USHA RANI Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Original Petition is a petition under Art.226 of the Constitution of India for issue of writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce the petitioner's husband Sekar, who is detained as per the order of the District Magistrate and Collector, Thanjavur, the first respondent, in C.O.C.No. 24 of 1993 dated14-4-1993 passed under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 (Act 14 of 1982). When the petition was heard by two of us, it was felt that the judgment of a Division Bench in Seetha v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1993 Mad LW (Cri) 426 on which the petitioner's counsel placed reliance required reconsideration and the papers were laced before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, who constituted this Full Bench to hear the case.

(2.) The facts as found in the detention order are as follows: -- On 26-3-1993, Maruthanayagam gave a complaint to the Sub Inspector Of Police, Taluk police station, Kumbakonam, that on the previous night he purchased one bottle of illicit distilled arrack from the detenue, husband of the petitioner, on payment of Rs. 14/- and after Consuming the same, he felt giddiness, congestion of eyes and vomiting, for which he took treatment from a native Doctor at Kumbakonam. As he suspected adulteration in the arrack sold to him, he prayed for necessary action against the detenu. After recording his statement and making necessary entries in the General Diary, the Sub Inspector of police arranged a prohibition raid along with his Police Party and found the detenu selling arrack in a glass tumbler from a black colour plastic can to an unknown person, who dropped the tumbler-and ran away from the spot on seeing the police party. The accused was arrested on the spot and enquired and searched by the Sub Inspector in the presence of two Constables. He seized one black colour plastic can of 5 litres capacity containing I.D. arrack, one glass tumbler and a sum of Rs. 15 / - under the cover of mahazar. Samples of arrack were drawn in two bottles of about 500 ML and sealed in the presence of the witnesses. The remaining arrack was destroyed. A case was registered against the detenu in Kumbakonam Taluk Police Station as Crime No. 300/93 under Ss.4 (I)(i) and 4(1-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937. The accused and the materials seized were produced before the Judicial Magistrate-II, Kumbakonam on 27-3- 1993, who remanded the accused to judicial custody in the Sub-Jail, Kumbakonam on the same day. The case was investigated by the Inspector of police, Taluk Circle, Kumbakonam. On a requisition given by the Sub Inspector of Police, the Court sent the samples for Chemical analysis. The Assistant Director of Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Thanjavur examined the samples and found that the sample bottle contained Ethyl Alcohol, acids, Esters, Higher Alcohol, Aldahydes and Atropine. He also detected 4.62 Mg% (w/v) of Atropine. The Inspector of Police, Taluk Circle Kumbakonam gave a requisition on 12-4-1993 and examined the professor of Forensic Medicine, Thanjavur medical College and Police Surgeon, Thanjavur. He opined that if any person consumed I.D. arrack mixed with atropine 4.62 Mg% (w / v), he would develop giddiness, vomiting, congestion of eyes and respiratory failure, which if not treated vigorously would result in the death due to atropine poisoning. The detention order contains particulars of the cases in which the detenu had come to adverse notice. The detenu was convicted in seven cases under Ss. 4 (1)(a) and 4(1)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 and sentenced to pay fine. There is also reference to the 8th case registered as Crime No. 295/93 in Kumbakonam Taluk Police Station under Ss.4 (l)(i) and, 4(I-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, in which the accused was arrested, but he escaped and absconded. Then he was arrested on 26-3-1993 and the case in Crime No. 300/93 was registered, the facts leading to which have already been set out. In that case, he was enlarged on bail on 2-4-1993 by the Sessions Court.

(3.) On the above materials, the detaining authority was satisfied that the detenu was selling arrack mixed with poisonous substances in contravention of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 and the rules made there under, thereby acting prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Reference is made to the bail applications in Crime No. 300/93 in Criminal M.P. No. 1766 of 1993 and Crl. M.P. No. 7860 of 1993 and the release of the detenu on bail. The detention authority has recorded in the order that if the detenu remains or bail, he will indulge in similar activities, which will be prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and there is compelling necessity .to prevent him from indulging in further similar activities. On that basis, the detention order was passed on 14-4-1993.