BALAJI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made to the order of detention passed by the second respondent vide Proceedings No.56/2015 dated 29.01.2015, whereby the detenu, by name Balaji, son of Mohan, aged about 24 years, was ordered to be detained under the provisions 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 of 1982) branding him as a "Goonda".

(2.) THOUGH many grounds have been raised in the petition, Mr.C.C.Chellappan, 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 detenu has been in remand in the ground case in Cr.No.706/2014 registered by H -4 Korukkupet Police Station and 6th adverse case in Cr.No.1391/2014 registered by H -6 RK Nagar Police Station and two bail applications filed by him in the ground case before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.MP. Nos.19462 and 19842/2014 were dismissed on 10.12.2014 and 23.12.2014 and the subsequent bail application filed by the detenu in the ground case was also dismissed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.MP. No.577/2015 dated 21.01.2015 and he has not moved any further bail application in the ground case and the detenu has not filed any fresh bail application in the 6th adverse case as 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 another bail application in the ground case and by filing fresh bail application in the 6th adverse case. The learned counsel would add that admittedly, in this case, the detenu has not moved any further bail application in the ground case subsequent of the dismissal of the earlier applications and he has not filed any fresh bail application in the 6th adverse case. When no bail application is filed, there is no real 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 imminent 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 said cases, 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 Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE] and [c] 2012 [7] SCC 181 [HUIDROM KONUNGJAO SINGH VS. STATE OF MANIPUR] .