SANJAI GANDHI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU; DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE; SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the wife of the detenu, namely, Sanjai Gandhi, branded as 'Sand Offender' in detention order in P.D.No.35/2014, dated 22.05.2014 by the District Collector and District Magistrate, Thanjavur District, has sought for a writ of Habeas Corpus Petition.

(2.) The Detenu has come to the adverse notice of the police in one case registered in Cr.No.33 of 2014, under Section 21 of Mines and Mineral Act, 1957 and 379 IPC on the file of Thogur Police Station. The adverse case is under investigation, when the order of detention was passed. The order of detention was passed on the basis of the ground case alleged to have registered on 06.05.2014 on the file of Thogur Police Station. in Cr.No.34/2014 under Section 21 of Mines and Minerals Act, 1957 and 379 IPC. On being satisfied that the Detenu is habitually indulging in activities, affecting the public Order, the Detaining Authority has clamped the Detention Order on the Detenu. At paragraph 6, the Detaining Authority has concluded as follows: 6. Hence, I infer that it is very likely of his (Sanjai Gandhi) coming out on bail in the above case. If he comes out on bail, he will indulge in such further activities which will be prejudicial to the maintenance of Public Order. Further, the recourse to normal criminal law would not have the desired effect of effectively preventing him from indulging in such activities, which are prejudicial to the maintenance of Public Order.

(3.) Challenging the Impugned Order, though the learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia has raised many contentions, We do not propose to go into all the grounds of challenge, since in our considered view, the point urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a delay in consideration of the representation merits acceptance.