KANNIKA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition by the wife of the detenu for a writ of habeas corpus to produce the detenu and set him at liberty.

(2.) The husband of the petitioner, one Gemini alias Lakshmanan was detained under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities and Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982) on the ground that he is a habitual criminal and that with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order it was necessary to detain him under the provisions of that Act. He was accordingly detained by an order dt. 30-1-1984, and kept in custody in the central prison. The grounds of detention referred to the main instance as one of murder that took place on 10-1-1984. On that day, it is alleged that the detenu with his associates about six in number formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the intention of attacking and committing the muffler of one Neelakandan and they did commit rioting and ultimately it also happened to be a case of murder. A case was registered in crime No.16 of 1984 of R.5 Choolaimedu police station for offences under Ss.147, 148, 341, 324 and 309 I.P.C. The detenu surrendered on 13-1-1984, and his associates were arrested on various days. The detenu was remanded by the X Metropolitan Magistrate. On 27-1-1984, he was given to police custody. On 28-1-1984, he was again surrendered back to judicial custody and on the date when the order of detention was made, he was in remand.

(3.) The instances which were relied on for treating the detenu as a habitual criminal and as a Goonda for taking action under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, are two in number. The first instance was a case in crime No.45 of 1978, R.5 Choolaimedu police station, for offences under Ss.324 and 34 I.P.C. in which it was stated that on 3-1-1978 he and his associates were convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 75 each. The second instance relates to a petty case No.1132 of 1983 on the file of the same police station under S.75 of the City Police Act, in which also the detenu was fined.