SELVARAJ ALIAS CHINRAJ Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second respondent herein clamped an order of detention as against the detenu/petitioner, as the said authority arrived at the subjective satisfaction that the said detenu is a Goonda and he has to be detained under section 3 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Officers, goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 ).

(2.) 1. The order of detention dated 6. 7. 2007 came to be passed by the second respondent on the basis of the ground case in Crime No. 388 of 2007 on the file of Kilpauk Police station for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 336, 427, 397 and 506 (2) IPC, complaint of which was given by one arivazhagan. On 15. 6. 2007, the complainant was proceeding at Diwan Rama Road and Dr. Azhagappa Road junction and when he was crossing the detenu, he was asked to stop and beaten by the detenu. At the point of knife, he threatened the complainant to hand over the gold ring and cash. As the complainant prevented him to take gold ring and cash, the detenu kicked him and forcibly took the gold ring and cash. The complainant raised alarm and on hearing the same, the nearby public came to his rescue. The accused picked up stones and cool drink bottles and hurled the same against them. The public seeing the atrocious activities of the detenu ran for safer places out of fear of danger. At that time, the police personnel attached to Kilpauk Police station, who came to the spot, surrounded the detenu and apprehended him. 2. 2. Apart from the above, the detaining authority also took note of four adverse cases pending against the detenu, viz. , Crime Nos. 1206 of 2006, 211 of 2007 and 385 of 2007 on the file of Kilpauk Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 and 392 IPC; and Crime no. 283 of 2007 on the file of Chetpet Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 380 IPC. 2. 3. The detaining authority, having satisfied that the detenu is indulging in activities which are prejudicial to maintenance of public order, passed the impugned order.

(3.) CHALLENGING the said detention, the detenu has come forward with the present Habeas Corpus Petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to call for the records relating to his detention vide order of the second respondent in c. No. 292 of 2007, dated 6. 7. 2007 approved by the first respondent, to set aside the same and to produce him, now detained in Central Prison, Puzhal-II, Chennai, before this court and to set him at liberty.