SRILEKHA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether the petitioner's father's detention can be prevented from being detained under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 even before any detention order is issued by the second respondent Detaining Authority, i.e., District Collector, Vellore ?

(2.) THE petitioner claims to be a medical graduate and is an house surgeon. It is her case that her father G.G.Ramesh was running a lodge at Vellore known as M/s.Geethanjali Lodge. According to her, he is a disabled person. He is having continuous treatment in the CMC Hospital, Vellore for over 20 years. He is sick and infirm. An attempt was made on his life by one Kuppan @ Sathish during March, 2011. As a counter blast to the event, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner's father in Crime No.295 of 2012. At present, he is enlarged on bail with a condition to appear before the Vellore North Police Station. It was also stated that an another FIR was registered in Crime No.339 of 2012 as if he had attacked one Mohammed Sheriff and it is a false case. THE petitioner's bail application is pending consideration before the District Sessions Court at Vellore. THE petitioner has reason to believe that the Inspector of Police, North Police Station, Vellore had sent a proposal to detain the petitioner's father under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982) (for short Goondas Act) and had sworn to an affidavit to that effect. According to the petitioner, even before the detaining authority can make up his mind, he should be prevented from passing an order to detain the petitioner's father and such detention order if passed will be violative of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution.

(3.) HOWEVER, Mr.R.Sankarasubbu, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended that Article 21 is repository of personal liberty. An order under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 has to conform to the mandate of Article 22 of the Constitution. As to how a law on preventive detention has to be construed came to be considered by the Supreme Court in A.K. Roy v. Union of India reported in (1982) 1 SCC 271 and in paragraph 74 it was observed as follows: