PERIYAKKAL Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the mother of the detenu and challenge is made to the order of detention dated 24.09.2013 made in No. 1111/2013, passed by the 2nd respondent under which the detenu has been branded as a 'Goonda' and detained 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, 1982, hereinafter referred to as Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

(2.) AS per the grounds of detention dated 24.09.2013, the detenu came to the adverse notice in the following case: -

(3.) AMIDST several grounds raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner to attack the impugned order of detention, he mainly focussed his argument that the detaining authority failed to ask clarification from the sponsoring authority about non serving of arrest memo in a proper manner to the family members, relatives or friends of the detenu and there was no proof to show that the intimation of arrest was given, as the arrest was communicated through cell phone to the father of the detenu, which clearly shows non -application of mind on the part of detaining authority.