A SAKUNTHALA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, mother of the detenue, who was detained under Act 14 of 1982, seeks a writ of habeas corpus to call for the records relating to the order of detention dated 6.6.2005 on the file of the first respondent herein made in his Office ref.D.O.No.20/2005-C2, to quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents herein to produce the detenue Kalaivani before this Court and thereafter set her at liberty from the Central Prison, Vellore.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, the ground case was said to have taken place on 22.5.2005. On that day, at about 10.00 hours, one Kannan gave an oral statement (complaint) to the Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Tiruvannamalai, which was recorded subsequently, that at about 8.00 hours, when he went to Samuthiram Colony, Tiruvannamalai he found one Kalaivani, selling I.D. arrack at the rear side of her house. He purchased two tumblers of I.D. arrack for Rs.20/- and consumed the same. On consumption of the said arrack, he experienced burning sensation in his stomach, chest and throat and fell down on the road side. He further stated that though he had consumed arrack for a number of times previously, he had never experienced such an indisposition. Hence, on suspecting that some poisonous substance might have been mixed with the I.D. arrack to increase the effect of intoxication, he reported the same to the police with a view to avoid such danger to the lives of any other persons. A case was registered in Crime No.1030 of 2005 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Town Police Sation, for the offence punishable under Sections 4(1)(i) r/w 4(1-A)(ii) TNP Act, 1937.

(3.) ON perusal of the documents produced before us, is apparent on the face of the record that the above discrepancy discloses the pre determined view of the Government and the non application of mind by the detaining authority before passing the order of detention. Hence, the impugned order of detention is vitiated and the same is quashed. The habeas corpus petition is allowed. The detenu is directed to be released forthwith, unless he is required in connection with any other case.