MATHIVANAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein challenges the impugned order of detention, dated 5. 4. 2006, detaining his brother by name Ramesh @ Kothali Ramesh 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 Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

(3.) AT the foremost, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the grounds of detention in Tamil, both the accused namely, Ramesh @ Kothali Ramesh and Babu were enquired and they gave voluntary confessional statements, which were recorded by the Sub Inspector of Police. However, in the English version of the grounds of detention, it is duly stated that the confessional statement of Babu was not furnished to the detenu and was also not placed before the detaining authority, which vitiates the detention order.