STALIN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE detention order dated 17. 7. 2004 branding the petitioner as Goonda, is the subject matter of the challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.

(2.) ON a perusal of the records, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is clear that the petitioner was arrested on 24. 6. 2004 in respect of the ground case which was registered in Crime No. 700 of 2004 and also in respect of three adverse cases, which would relate to the instances that took place on 2. 6. 2004, 20. 6. 2004 and 19. 6. 2004 respectively. A separate arrest card would show that he has been arrested in all the four cases. It is also seen from the records that requisition has been given to the concerned Magistrate to remand the petitioner in all the four cases. Accordingly, he was in remand from 25. 6. 2004 in all the four cases and periodically it was extended up to 23. 7. 2004. Even then, the detaining authority has not chosen to refer to the arrest in respect of other adverse cases in the detention order dated 17. 7. 2004. Thus, it is clear that the detaining authority was under the impression that the petitioner/detenu was in remand only in respect of ground case and there is imminent possibility of the detenu coming out on bail in the said case. It shows that the detaining authority has not applied its mind, since reference has not been made about the remand in other adverse cases.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY, the impugned order of detention is set aside. The Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless he is required in connection with any other case.