MEGATHAS Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the wife of the detenu - Syed Mohammed Imam @ Munir, who has been detained as "Goonda " under Section

(2.) (f) of the Tamil Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982, on the orders of the second respondent, by his proceedings C.P.O./T.C/I.S/D.O.No. 40/2011, dated 28.12.2011. Now, he has been lodged at Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli. 2. Even though several grounds were raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, he is pressing a point that the detention order was passed by the detaining authority solely on the basis of a bail order granted in Crime No. 709 of 2010, which was registered for offence under Section 379 of IPC, the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Tiruchirapalli in Cr. M.P.No. 1853 of 2010, dated 30.4.2010, therefore, the detenu, who has already filed bail applications will be released on bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said criminal case registered in Crime No. 709 of 2010 is only for an offence under Section 379 IPC and the bail order was granted as the learned Public Prosecutor said no objections in considering the custody of the said accused for more than 39 days, and the said facts are entirely different from the cases pending against the detenu in Crime Nos. 1435 of 2011, 1427 of 2011, 173 of 2011 and 1756 of 2011, where the alleged offences are under Sections 379 IPC, 393 IPC and 392 read with 397 of IPC and 25(1) of Arms Act and 3 of Explosive Substances Act , respectively. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the said bail order having been relied on, the detaining authority has not applied to his mind to the cases pending against the detenu.

(3.) WE have considered the rival submissions.