PERARIVALAN Vs. DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of mandamus for directing the respondent to forebear from invoking the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, hereinafter called the TADA Act, in Crime No.9/5/91 C.B.I./S.P.E./MAS on the file of the respondent.

(2.) THE admitted facts are: In respect of the occurrence on 21.5.1991 at Sriperumbudur relating to the assassination of the former Prime Minister Shri Rajiv Gandhi and others, a casein Crime No.329 of 1991 of Sriperumbudur Police Station was registered on 22.5.1991 under Secs.302, 307 and 326, I.P.C., read with Secs.3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act. Subsequently the case was taken up for further investigation by the respondent on 24.5.1991 by S.P.E./C.B.I./Madras which registered Crime No.9/5/91 under the same sections of law. On 31.5.1991 further sections of law were included in the F.I.R. viz.,Sec.120-B, I.P.C. and Sec.3 of the TADA Act. During tine course of investigation the petitioner was taken into custody, he was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chennai Anna District at Chengalpattu on 10.6.1991 and on the same day he was remanded to the judicial custody and the petitioner continued to bean judicial custody.

(3.) IN Erram Sarsh Reddy v. State of A. P. Erram Sarsh Reddy v. State of A. P. , A.I.R. 1991 S.C. 1678the Supreme Court, after going through the evidence ofP. Ws. 1,2 and 5 found that the prosecutions established that when the police raided the premises of the appellants, one of the appellants hurled a bomb on them and when the appellants surrendered, fre-arms and explosives were recovered from them. On the said finding the Supreme Court held as follows: