LAWS(MAD)-2007-8-85

USHA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Decided On August 28, 2007
USHA Appellant
V/S
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by one Usha, wife of Prabha alias Prabhu, son of Sarangapani (hereinafter referred to as the "detenu"), calling for the records relating to the proceeding dated 17. 3. 2007 made in B. D. F. G. I. S. S. V. No. 18 of 2007 on the file of the second respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act') branding him as a "goonda", to quash the same and to direct the second respondent to produce the body of the detenu now detained at Central Prison, Puzhal and to set him at liberty.

(2.) THE order of detention dated 17. 3. 2007 was passed on the basis of ground case in Crime No. 43 of 2007 for alleged commission of offences under Sections 294 (b), 384, 506 (ii) of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the detenu was that on 28. 2. 2007 at about 10. 00 a. m. , when one Radhakrishnan, a roadside vendor selling tea and snacks at Otteri Bazaar in Kelambakkam Road, was at his shop, the detenu and one Ramesh came there and demanded mamool and threatened him stating that failing which, he would be killed. They were armed with knives. The detenu picked two numbers of hundred rupee notes from the complainant's shirt pocket. The knives they showed contained blood stains. The general public and shopkeepers, who witnessed this scattered and ran away on all sides in panic to safeguard their lives and property. The detenu and Ramesh whirled their knives over their heads and they sharpened their knives in such a way to create fire sparkles, and they went towards the TEAM Company. That apart, the detaining authority also took note of the three adverse cases pending against the detenu in Crime Nos. 282/2004, 283/2004 and 42/2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 302, 449 of the Indian Penal Code. The detaining authority, having satisfied that the detenu is indulging in activities which are prejudicial to maintenance of public order, passed the impugned order branding him as a 'goonda".

(3.) THERE is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. We have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents and perused the materials produced before us.