PRABAKARAN Vs. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed to quash the detention order passed by the second respondent in PD.No.55/2020 dated 08.09.2020, wherein the detenue namely, Manjula, aged about 41 years has been branded as 'Immoral Traffic Offender' as contemplated under Section 2(g) of the of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

(2.) Mr.K.Navaneetharaja, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would argue that though the petitioner has several grounds to assail the detention order impugned in this habeas corpus petition, he confines his argument with regard to the failure on the part of the respondents in intimating the arrest of the detenue to the family members or the relatives of the detenue. According to the learned counsel, non-intimation of the arrest to the relatives of the detenue or her family members infringed the rights of the detenue making effective representation to the authorities to revoke the detention order. In this regard, the learned counsel has placed reliance upon the decision of the Honourable Apex Court in the case of D.KBasu vs. State of West Bengal, reported in AIR (1997) SC 610. It is also submitted that while arriving at the subjective satisfaction, the detaining authority has wrongly described the detenue as habitual offender when she is implicated only in the ground case alone.

(3.) Per contra, Mr.K.Dinesh Babu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would argue that the detaining authority, namely, the second respondent herein, after being satisfied with the materials produced by the sponsoring authority, has passed the detention order only to prevent the detenu from indulging in similar offence in future, which would prejudice to the maintenance of the public order. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, there is no infirmity or irregularity in the order of detention passed by the second respondent and hence, he prayed for dismissal of the Habeas Corpus Petition.