KANNAN ALIAS KANNAPPAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although several contentions are raised and most of them have been effectively replied in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the detaining authority, in the instant case we find that the petitioners detention under Section 3 (i) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 is not sustainable. The detenu, it appears, is a habitual criminal. The grounds of detention show that in three cases, that is to say, D-3 Ice House Police-station Crime No. 1186/89, D-1 Triplicane Police Station Crime No. 2838189 and E-4 Abhiramapuram Police Station Crime No. 1495 of 1989, he has been charged with the offences under Sections 380, 511,380 and 75,457 and 380 I.P.C. respectively and is on bail granted by the Court. There are nine more cases alleged against him including E-4 Abhiramapuram Police Station Crime No. 15091 89, E-4 Abhiramapuram Police Station Crime No. 1515 of 1989,12 Adayar Police Station Crime No. 136 of 1990, J2 Adayar Police-station Crime No.150/90. F-3 Nungambakkam Police-Station Crime No.5 16/90. K.6, Chatram Police-Station Crimp No. 561/90. J.2 Adayur Police-Station Crime No. 190/90, K.4 Annu Nagar Police-Station Crime NO. 583/90 and D-1 Triplicane Police-Station Crime No. 866190. In these cases, it is said that he has been remanded to prison except EA Abhiramapuram Police-station Crime No 1115/90 in which case it is stated that he has been released on bail. It does not appear, however, how when he was a remand prisoner in Abhiramapuram Police-Station Crime No. 1509 of 1998. after his arrest in connection. with Abhiramapuram Police-Station Crime No. 1515 of 89, he was found committing offences in April, 1990 and thereafter in the cases cited above being Adayar Police-station Crime No. 136190, Adayar Police-Station Crime No. 150/90, F-3 Nungambakkam Police Station Crime No. 516/90, K.6, Chatram Police-Station Crime No. 561190, J.2 Adayar Police-Station Crime No. 190/90, KA Annanagar Police Station Crime No. 583/90 and D-1 Triplicane Police Station Crime No. 866/90. These arc all cases relating to the offences committed either in April, 1990 and thereafter. It appears, however, from the ground case in which on 18.7.1990 at about 18 hours, it is said that the petitioner committed certain offences and was arrested on 18.7.1990 and in most of the cases aforementioned he was remanded only after his arrest except Abhiramapuram Police-station Crime No. 1509189 in which case he was shown remanded to judicial custody after his arrest in Abhiramapuram Police-Station crime No. 1515 of 1989. There is no mention anywhere in the grounds that he had been released on bail in Abhiramapuram. Police-Station Crime NO. 1509189 although it is said that he was released on bail in Abhiramapuram Police-Station Crime No. 1515 of 89. In the ground case, the story is typical of a thief chased and arrest it, a story almost common in most of the ground cases of arrest and detention under Section 3(i) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

(2.) One Dayalan, it is stated, was staying in Room No.1 of S.A.A. Mansion, Triplicane occasionally on 18/7/1990 at about 18.00 hours he went ID the Vinayagar Temple, opposite to the mansion. When he came out of the Temple and while entering into the mansion, he noticed that his loom was kept open and the lock was broken act that somebody was inside the room. He rushed into the room and found the petitioner committing theft of a wrist watch kept on the table and a silver kolusu and a small silver plate kept in the table drawer. Immediately, he questioned (mailer in other language) and rushed to catch the petitioner at the spot. The petitioner used his first and hit Dayalan on his face and chest with his right hand Dayalan fell down on the floor. However he got up and raised alarm. The petitioner succeeded in coming out of the mansion. Shanmugham and Arumugham, two persons, who were near the spot joined Dayalan in his pursuit to apprehend the petitioner. The petitioner, however, turned back and demonstrated a sharp rod and exhorted (matter in other (anguage) Dayalan and the two other persons, however, surrounded the petitioner. The petitioner then dropped the iron rod and rushed to a nearby shop of one Ramesh, picked up two soda water bottles and hurled them on the road side. It is stated thereafter the soda water bottle fell on the road side, and broke into pieces. The splinters scattered on all directions. The public who were standing nearby the shops, the public who came for shopping and who were taking tea at the nearby tea-stall, noticed the atrocious activities of the petitioner and they ran helter-skelter for safety. The auto-rickshaw drivers who were standing there with their autos feared danger to their life and property and left the spot with their autos. The hotel, tea shop owners, and the nearby shop owners closed down their shops and suspended their business. The public who came out from the nearby Star theatre, noticed the atrocious activities and ran inside the The free flow of traffic in that area was dislocated. However, Dayalan and others tried to catch the culprit. Jesuraj and Gopalakrishnan and police personnel who were on beat duty noticed this and surrounded the culprit and also caught hold of him at the spot with the assistance of the witnesses. Dayalan took out the silver plate, kolusu and the wrist watch from the petitioners pant pocket. Dayalan identified the iron rod. The iron rod was picked up by the police from the spot, from where it was thrown. Later, the properties and ironrod used to attack the public were taken to D-1 Triplicane Police-Station with the petitioner by Dayalan and others. Dayalan lodged a complaint in this regard to the Inspector of Police-D-1 Crimes. Sivaraman, Inspector of Police, Crimes, D-1 Police-Station registered a case in C-I Cr. No. 1031190 under sections 392 read with 397, 394, 336,426 and 506 (ii) I.P.C.

(3.) It is said that the petitioner confessed to have committed the said offence and other offences also. The detaining authority had added: I am aware that Thiru Kannan alias Kannappan alias Great Kannan is in remand and there is imminent possibility that he may come out on bail for the offences under Sections 392 read with 397, 394, 336, 426 and 506 (ii) I.P.D., by filing bail application in the Court. If he comes out on bail, he will indulge in further activities which will be prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Further, the recourse to normal criminal law would not have the decried effect of effectively preventing him from indulging in such activities which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.