RITA Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the wife of the detenu by name Arjunan, who was detained as a "bootlegger" as contemplated under Section 3 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 (in short "tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982") by the impugned order of detention dated 10. 02. 2006, challenges the same in this petition.

(2.) HEARD both sides.

(3.) AT the foremost, the learned counsel for the petitioner by drawing our attention to the reference made in paragraph 3 of the grounds of detention viz. , the remaining I. D arrack and fermented wash were destroyed at the spot and a "certificate" was prepared to that effect, submitted that no such certificate was prepared as per Section 32 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 and the only document available is destruction mahazar, which finds place at page 56 of the paper book supplied to the detenu. According to him, in the absence of the certificate as stated in paragraph 3 of the detention order, it is presumed that the detaining authority has not applied his mind while passing the detention order. He has also heavily relied on the decision of this Court dated 25. 09. 2003 in HCP No. 2580 of 2002. In that case, before the Division bench, a similar contention was raised. A perusal of the details mentioned in the said decision shows that in that case also the destruction mahazar alone was prepared and a copy was supplied to the detenu. However, as in the present case, the detaining authority therein referred to the said document as a certificate prepared under Section 32 of The Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937. The Division Bench after finding that the document available in the paper book does not amount to certificate in terms of Section 32 of The Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 and after holding that the detaining authority has not applied his mind, quashed the detention order.