MUNUSWAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second respondent herein clamped an order of detention as against the detenue Vijaya, wife of the petitioner, as the said authority arrived at the subjective satisfaction that the said detenue is a Bootlegger and she 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.) CHALLENGING the abovesaid detention, the husband of the detenue has come forward with the present Habeas Corpus Petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to call for the records leading to the detention of the detenue, now detained in Women Special Prison, Vellore under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order dated 5. 7. 2007 on the file of the second respondent herein made in C3. Tha. Ka. Order No. 48 of 2007, to quash the same and to direct the respondents herein to produce the detenue before this Court and to set her at liberty.

(3.) 3. 1 The order of detention dated 5. 7. 2007 was passed on the basis of ground case in Crime No. 350 of 2007 for alleged commission of offences under Sections 4 (1) (i), 4 (1) (aaa), 4 (1-A) (ii) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. The allegation against the detenue was that on 15. 6. 2007 when the Sub-Inspector of Police, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Ranipet and his police party watched observed villages within the limits of Kaveripakkam Police Station in connection with prohibition offences, they found the detenue pouring white liquid from a plastic can, and on seeing the police party, the person who was standing for consuming escaped from the place. The detenue was arrested and she admitted the offences committed. They seized 360 Litres of poisonous odour country arrack. The samples of arrack seized were sent for chemical analysis and the report of the Assistant Director and Assistant Chemical Examiner to Government, Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Vellore reveals that the samples contain 6. 9 mgms% w/v of Atropine per 100 ml. a poisonous substance. 3. 2. Apart from the above, the detaining authority also took note of the four adverse cases pending against the detenu, viz. , i. Crime No. 923 of 2006 registered on the file of Kaveripakkam Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 4 (1) (i) (aaa) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 25. 12. 2006; ii. Crime No. 45 of 2007 registered on the file of Kaveripakkam Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 4 (1) (i) (aa) and 4 (1-A) (ii) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 1. 2. 2007; iii. Crime No. 81 of 2007 registered on the file of Kaveripakkam Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 4 (1) (i) and 4 (1-A) (ii) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 28. 2. 2007; and iv. Crime No. 157 of 2007 registered on the file of Kaveripakkam Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 4 (1) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act with reference to the occurrence said to have taken place on 23. 4. 2007. 3. 3. The detaining authority, having satisfied that the detenue is indulging in activities which are prejudicial to maintenance of public order and public health, passed the impugned order.