S RANI Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is wife of the detenu by name Kumar @ Senthil Kumar. She challenges the detention order dated 08. 08. 2005, wherein her husband was detained under Section 3 (1) of Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1988 (in short "ndps Act" ).

(2.) HEARD Mr. R. Rajarathinam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A. Kandasamy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent and Mr. P. Kumaresan, learned Additional Central Government standing counsel for the second respondent.

(3.) THOUGH several grounds have been raised in the affidavit questioning the impugned detention order, at the foremost, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner projected that in the absence of cogent materials available before the Detaining Authority to arrive at a subjective satisfaction that there was an imminent possibility of coming out on bail, the detaining Authority, committed an error in passing the impugned order of detention.