MUNUSAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the husband of the detenue Vijaya who was detained as a ''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), by the impugned detention order dated 31. 03. 2006, challenges the same in this Petition.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

(3.) AT the foremost, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that inasmuch as even on 15. 3. 2006, when the bail application was dismissed of by the Principal Sessions Judge, Vellore, it was brought to the notice of the Court that the accused therein/detenue is likely to be detained under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The perusal of the order dated 15. 3. 2006 made in Crl. M. P. No. 2080 of 2006, which is available at page 51 of the Paper book shows that such information was brought to the notice of the court and on that basis, the learned Principal Sessions Judge dismissed the bail application. It amply shows that the authorities predetermined in invoking detention order in the case of the detenue. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the detaining authority inspite of such observation by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Vellore, has not explained or shown awareness in the grounds of detention that with the available materials, he had taken such decision. In the absence of such awareness in the grounds of detention, we hold that the respondents have prejudged and decided to detain her as a bootlegger under Act 14, which vitiates the ultimate detention order passed by him. On this ground, the detention order is liable to be quashed.