AZHAGIRI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the point involved in all these petitions is identical, a common order is passed. For convenience, we shall refer the details in H. C. P. No. 289 of 2005.

(2.) THE petitioner challenges the detention order dated 23. 01. 2005, detaining the detenue by name Sivakami as a goonda under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner, after taking us through the grounds of detention and all other connected materials, has projected that inasmuch as the detenue was arrested when she was in custody in another case for an offence under section 302 IPC, which is grave in nature, the detaining authority has not considered the said aspect at the time of passing the detention order and based his reliance only on the adverse case, in which the offence is lesser in nature. According to the learned counsel, in the absence of any specific reference that the detenue is in remand in respect of a graver offence and failure to take note of the said aspect vitiates the order of detention.