PURUSOTH Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.N.Pragalanthan learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Dinesh Babu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

(2.) Challenging the order of detention in P.D.No.34/2020 dated 14.10.2020 passed by the second respondent, branding the detenu, namely, Purusoth, son of Charles, Male aged about 26 years, as "Goonda" as contemplated under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, the detenu himself has filed this habeas corpus petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the detention order impugned in this habeas corpus petition is liable to be set aside, since there was no proper intimation of arrest of the detenu in the ground case. He would further submit that no details have been furnished particularly the cell number mentioned at page No.181 of the booklet, whether it belongs to the family members of the detenu or his relatives. It is also stated that the text of the SMS also not found in the booklet. In this regard, the learned counsel has placed reliance upon the decision of the Honourable Apex Court in the case of D.K.Basu vs. State of West Bengal , 1997 AIR(SC) 610 .