MERI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE daughter of the detenu is the Petitioner.

(2.) THE Petitioner came to adverse notice of the authorities in three adverse cases and in the ground case she was arrested on 19.11.2011 and a case was registered in Cr. No.375 of 2011 for the offences under Sections 4(1)(a) r/w 4(1)(A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act and produced her before the XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, who remanded her to judicial custody till 28.11.2011.

(3.) THE learned Counsel further submitted that even in the Special Report of the Sponsoring Authority, it is not stated that the detenu was granted bail in the aforesaid two cases. THErefore, according to the learned Counsel, the said statement has been made without any material and therefore, the order of detention is vitiated.