P MARY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WIFE of the detenu challenges the detention order dated 27. 04. 2005, detaining her husband by name Palani @ Press Palani 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 for the petitioner submitted that there was delay in disposal of the representation of the detenu. The particulars furnished by the learned Government Advocate show that there was no delay at any point of time. Though it is pointed out that the Minister for prohibition and Excise passed orders on 10. 11. 20 05 and that the rejection letter was prepared only on 15. 11. 2005, we are of the view that, if we exclude the intervening holidays on 12th and 13th November, 2005, there is no delay at all as claimed and it cannot be said that the time taken by the Officials for preparation of the rejection letter is on the higher side. Thus, we reject the said contention.