M.S. GURU @ GURUSAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME, PROHIBITION & EXCISE DEPARTMENT & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner, who is the detenu herein, has been branded as a "Goonda" as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 in Cr.M.P. No.27/12/C1 dated 17.11.2012.

(2.) THE detenu came to adverse notice in the following cases:

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner submits that two cases have been shown as ground cases, viz., Crime Nos.2 & 14 of 2012 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Erode. The grounds of detention inform that in respect of Crime No.2 of 2012, one co -accused by name Suresh moved a Bail Application before the Special Judge for Tamil Nadu for Protection of Investors and Depositors Act Cases, Coimbatore in Crl.M.P. No.1718 of 2012 and bail was granted to him on 1.9.2012. The Crl.M.P. No.1718 of 2012 moved before such Court was not a Petition for bail moved by the co -accused Suresh, but a Petition for recall of warrant in a different case. Further, in respect of Crime No.14 of 2012, no co -accused had been granted bail, nor had any Application for bail been moved by the Petitioner so as to justify the conclusion that there was imminent possibility of the detenu coming out on bail in such case. Learned Counsel would also state that the Petitioner had made Representation dated 6.12.2012 to the Detaining Authority and another on 10.12.2012 to the 1st Respondent. While the first representation has not seen any response, the subsequent one was rejected after much delay on 26.12.2012. Therefore, learned Counsel would submit that besides the Order of Detention suffering from non -application of mind, delay in consideration of the representation also rendered it bad in law.