KANDASAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE Kandaswami, (petitioner) is the father of the detenu, ravi alias Gundu Ravi. The detenu, it is said, is an immoral traffic offender. Apart from the ground case, as set out in the grounds of detention, he had come to adverse notice in two other cases. The District Magistrate and District collector, Salem (second respondent) in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 3 of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, clamped upon the detenu the impugned order of detention in his proceedings C. M. P. No. 27/ I. T. O. / 94/ (C2 ). date d 17. 4. 1994, with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and health.

(2.) MR.S. Rajasekar , learned counsel for the petitioner would press into service the following points for consideration: (1) There is inordinate delay in considering the representation dated 12. 5. 1994 of the detenu and consequently the right of representation inhering in his favour under Art. 22 (5) of the Constitution of India had been greatly affected. (2) The family members of the detenu had not been intimated within areasonable time about the place of detention of the detenu , and (3) The instructions given by the sponsoring authority to the Public Prosecutor that proceedings for the detention of the detenu under Act 14 of 1982 are pending before the competent authority getting reflected in the copy of the bail order dated 6. 4. 1994 of the Court of Session, Salem, in Crl. M. P. Nos. 2136 to 2138 of 1994 would tantamount to pre-conception of the passing of the impugned order of detention on the mind of the second respondent- Detaining authority.

(3.) FOR the above reasons, the petition deserves to be dismissed and the same is accordingly dismissed. .