BILAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brother of the detenu has filed the above Habeas Corpus Petition praying to quash the order of detention dated 27.8.2002 passed by the second respondent under Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The detenu was branded as a 'Goonda'.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows :- The detenu is involved in 18 cases of offences mostly against property, namely house breaking and theft of jewellery and other items. He had been convicted in 16 cases and the other two cases are pending trial. While so, on 3.8.2002, one Thiru. Janakiraman of Chetpet, Vandavasi preferred a complaint, inter alia, contending that while he was going to the auto stand for work, the detenu suddenly dashed on him and held him by pulling his shirt. When the complainant questioned this, the detenu suddenly took out a knife and by threatening to kill him, snatched Rs.150/- from his shirt pocket. When the complainant attempted to prevent this, the detenu assaulted him by using a knife and caused bleeding and lacerated injuries on the complainant. On his shouts for rescue, the detenu further snatched the complainant's wrist watch and threatened the public who tried to come to the rescue of the complainant by showing the knife. The public passing by the road, seeing his deadly activities, ran away in all directions out of fear, the shop owners closed their shops and the traffic in that area was paralyzed. Taking advantage of this confusion, the detenu escaped with the cash and the wrist watch. The complainant came to the police station and gave an oral complaint. The Inspector of Police registered a case in Vandavasi South Police Station Crime No.156 of 2002 under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code and sent the complainant to the Government Hospital for treatment. On further investigation, the Inspector of Police arrested the detenu on 6.8.2002 at 1100 hours at Vandavasi-Chetpet Road near Anjukannu Varavathi. The detenu gave a voluntary confession statement. The knife used to assault the complainant and the wrist watch snatched from him were recovered from the possession of the detenu and the recovery of the motorcycle revealed that it was stolen from Pondicherry and the Inspector also subsequently recovered many of the stolen properties under the cover of a mahazar. The detenu was produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Vandavasi on 7.8.2002, who remanded him to judicial custody. The seized articles were sent to the Court Under Form-95. The investigation of the case was not completed and it was found that the offence relates to endangering human lives by committing robbery and criminal intimidation punishable under Chapters XVI and XVII of the Indian Penal Code. It was noticed that the detenu was already involved in 18 cases, out of which he has been convicted in 16 cases and the other two cases are pending trial. The investigation in those cases revealed the violent activities of the detenu and the detenu was found to have been habitually committing the offences of house breaking by night and day and committing theft and robbery by endangering human life and personal safety of the public repeatedly and indulging in brutal activities. The activities of the detenu had created a feeling of insecurity in the minds of the public in the area and thus disturbed the normal life of the community, the tranquility and tempo of the society were also paralyzed and public order was affected to a great extent. In these circumstances, from the materials placed before the detaining authority, he was satisfied that there was a compelling necessity to detain the detenu with a view to prevent him from indulging in such prejudicial activities in future and accordingly passed the impugned order of detention. The said order is now under challenge.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner made detailed submissions, the summary of which is given below :