K MAYAKRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the father of the detenu by name Kannan, who was detained as a "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), by the impugned detention order dated 19. 09. 2005, challenges the same in this Petition.

(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 submitted that the impugned order of detention is liable to be quashed on the ground of non application of mind. In support of the above contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner taking us through the averments in para 4 of the grounds of detention and other connected documents available in the paper book, contended that in the light of the discrepancy and of the fact that the alleged offence under Section 392 IPC has not been noted anywhere except in the grounds of detention, it should have been inserted at a later point of time.