RAMAMURTHY GOUNDER Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the father of the detenu by name Araselvam @ arachelvam. He challenges the detention order dated 15. 07. 2005, detaining his son as "goonda" as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral traffic Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 ).

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned government Advocate for the respondents.

(3.) AT the foremost, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in the absence of materials to show that there was a valid order of the learned Magistrate concerned, extending the remand of the accused/detenu, based on which the order of detention order has been passed, the impugned order of detention is liable to be quashed. In support of the above contention, he relied on a Division Bench decision of this Court reported in 1994-1-Law Weekly (Cri) 266 ( Balaraman vs. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. George, madras-9 and another ).