(1.) The petitioner is the brother of the detenu by name Suresh @ Suresh Kumar. He challenges the order of preventive detention, dated 11.06.2008, clamped on his brother by the 2nd respondent branding him as a "Goonda" and detaining him under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982).
(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner mainly attacks the impugned order of detention on the ground of non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority while considering the possibility of the detenu coming out on bail and indulging again in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. According to the learned Counsel, the detaining authority, for arriving at the subjective satisfaction and to clamp the order of detention on the detenu, had relied upon three adverse cases, apart from the ground case and, in paragraph No. 5 of the grounds of detention, stated as follows:
(3.) By drawing our attention to the above excerpts from the grounds of detention, the learned Counsel contended that though the detaining authority was aware of the fact that the detenu is in remand in the ground case from 07.03.2008 and connected papers such as remand order, etc. have been furnished to the detenu in respect of ground case, he was not sure about the remand of the detenu in the adverse cases, as is evident from the above extracted portion of the grounds of detention. Learned Counsel would further contend that the remand orders in respect of three adverse cases were neither made available before the detaining authority nor copies thereof were furnished to the detenu and non-furnishing of such documents has caused great prejudice to the detenu and on this ground, the impugned order is liable to be quashed.