DHANALAKSHMI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the wife of the detenu by name Chandran. She challenges the impugned order of detention dated 22. 10. 2005, detaining her husband as 'bootlegger' 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 for the petitioner, by drawing our attention to the order of the Principal Sessions Judge, Vellore District, dated 03. 10. 2005, would contend that even in the said order, a statement has been made on behalf of the Sponsoring Authority that steps have already been taken to detain the accused/detenu under the Goondas Act. According to the counsel, thoug h the affidavit of the Sponsoring Authority is dated 07. 10. 2005, he has conveyed the decision that action is to be taken under the goondas Act, to the court even on 03. 10. 2005. According to the counsel, while passing the detention order, the Detaining Authority has not independently applied his mind de hors to the order dated 03. 10. 2005.