MUTHULAKSHMI Vs. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, STATE OF TAMIL NADU HOME, PROHIBITION & EXCISE DEPARTMENT AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made to the order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent vide Proceedings in Cr. M.P. No. 6/2014 [CS] dated 31.12.2014, whereby the son of the petitioner by name Pandian, son of Ramar, aged 43 years, was ordered to be detained under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 [Central Act 7 of 1980], branding him as a "Black Marketeer".

(2.) THOUGH many grounds have been raised in the petition, Mr. K.R. Ramesh, 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.) PER contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the order of detention has been passed on cogent and sufficient materials and the same cannot be interfered with at the instance of the petitioner. Therefore, he submits that the Habeas Corpus Petition does not merit any consideration and the same is liable to be dismissed.