CHINNAPONNU Vs. THE STATE OF TAMILNADU AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Habeas Corpus Petition is filed, by the mother of the detenu, namely, Prakash, Son of Tamilarasan, aged 24 years, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records, in S.C. No. 34/2014 dated 05.08.2014, passed by the 2nd Respondent, detaining the detenu, under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982), branding him as a "Goonda, in the Central Prison, Salem, and quash the same and to direct the Respondents to produce the body of the detenu and set him at liberty forthwith.

(2.) EVEN though, Mr. R. Narayanan, the learned counsel for the petitioner raised many grounds, in assailing the impugned order of detention, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, confines his argument only in respect of non -application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in passing the order of detention.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the detenue has been in remand in the ground case in Cr. No. 370/2014 and the detenu has not moved any bail application in the ground case on the date of the passing of the detention order. He would also contend that the detaining authority has placed reliance on the statement of the sponsoring authority to the effect that the relatives of the detenu are taking steps to take him out on bail by filing bail application in the said case. The learned counsel would add that admittedly, the detenu has not moved any bail application in the ground case and he is in remand. When no bail application is filed, there is no imminent possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. No cogent materials are available before the Detaining Authority to conclude/to apprehend that the detenu is likely to get bail in the ground case and there is real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail in the said cases. Hence, it is stated that the Detaining Authority has passed the impugned detention order in total non -application of mind and the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the Detaining Authority that there is real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail in the ground case is a mere ipse dixit without any cogent materials. In support of his contention, he relies on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in [a] : 2006 [1] MLJ [Crl.] 539, [T.V. Saravanan @ S.A.R. Prasanna Venkatachariar Chaturvedi v. State of Tamilnadu through Secretary and Another]; [b] : 2005 [1] CTC 577 [Velmurugan @ Velu v. The Commissioner of Police]; [c] : 2012 [7] SCC 181 [Huidrom Konungjao Singh v. State of Manipur] and [d] : 2008 [3] MLJ (Crl.) 144 [S. Andal v. District Magistrate and District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai and Another].