PAULRAJ Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Paulraj has been detained as a 'bootlegger' under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, in pursuance of an order of detention dated 19.11.1994, passed by the second respondent, District Magistrate and Collector, Madurai, with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

(2.) IT will be totally unnecessary to state the facts in detail, which led to the passing of the impugned order of detention, for on two substantial grounds petitioner will have to be freed from the clutches of this instant preventive order.

(3.) WE find another grave lacuna in the grounds of detention. Detaining Authority has stated in paragraph 5 that he was aware that Paulraj (detenu) was in remand and that he had not been released on bail, though he had been directed to be let out on bail. Without stating any further, on imminent possibilities, Detaining Authority has merely stated that if the detenu were allowed to remain at large, he will induce in further prejudicial activities. No where, application of mind to the fact of the likelihood of the detenu coming out on bail by furnishing sureties, has been stated. It is not as though this is an omission in this paragraph alone for, in paragraph 6 of the grounds, again the Detaining Authority has stated that if the detenu were let to remain at large, he will indulge in further prejudicial activities. Non -application of mind is apparent. On both the grounds, detenu is bound to succeed.