PADMAVATHI RAMACHANDRAN Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner is the wife of the detenu who was detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, on 8th April, 1985.

(2.) THE principal contention advanced by Mr. V.P. Raman, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, is that in the following circumstances, the order of detention suffers from several infirmities so as to vitiate the said order: In the forefront, it is pointed out that the detenu is a practising advocate. He was already arrested under the Customs Act and was released on bail by a competent Court. As a member of the Bar he will not scare himself away. After all, it is a single instance of alleged smuggling which is not as grave as to support the detention. It is too difficult to infer from a sole instance the tendency on the part of the detenu to indulge in smuggling activities or to be an abettor to such activities. He believed his clients who arranged for his to and fro passage from Madras to Singapore and also for his stay abroad. The statements of other persons referred to in the order of detention clearly indicate that his name was misused by others in sending unaccompanied luggage bearing his initials R.T.R. by M.V. Chidambaram. It is emphatically urged by the learned Counsel that in such circumstances if the provisions of the Act were to be invoked and a person like the detenu were to be detained, there is the grave danger to the liberty of a citizen, particularly when the detenu is being prosecuted under the Customs Act. Another string of the argument is that if the conclusion of the detaining authority did not follow from the preceding paragraphs as disclosed in the order of detention, the conclusion cannot be sustained. As the liberty of the citizen is being eroded by the detaining authority resorting to this Act, it is the Court which shall act as guardian of the liberty of the citizen and should see that there is no abuse of the power on innocent citizens.

(3.) FOR , there is at least a single instance of the detenu having some smuggled goods. In the order of detention, there(sic) is the following reference: