CHANDRASEKARAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the father of the detenu by name Napolean. He challenges the impugned order of detention dated 24.04.2008, detaining his son as "Goonda" as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot Leggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act (1982) (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982).

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner points out that while passing the detention order, the Detaining Authority relied on 6 adverse cases apart from the ground case and that all the 6 adverse cases relate to incidents that took place on different dates and including the ground case, arrest has been effected on 20.03.2008. Referring to the following portion at paragraph No.4 of the grounds of detention, " I am also aware that he has filed a bail application in South Crime Branch Cr.Nos.514/07, 06/08 and 186/08 in CRMP No.2073/08, 2071/08 and 2072/08 respectively and was granted bail on 10.04.08, and he has filed a bail application in the ground case in Cr.No.189/08 before the Principal Sessions Court, Thoothukudi in Cr.M.P.No.915/08 and the same has been posted for hearing on 24.04.2008. It is very likely that he may come out on bail. If he comes out on bail, he will indulge in further activities, which will be prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.", learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though the Detaining Authority has taken note of the fact that as regards adverse case Nos.1 to 3, the detenu was granted bail and, in respect of the ground case, stated that the detenu has filed a bail application and if he comes out on bail, he would indulge in further activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, there is utter non-application of mind on his part in respect of other 3 adverse cases on that line. Therefore, he pleads that the impugned order of detention may be set aside.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned order of detention dated 24.04.2008 passed in H.S.(M)Confdl.No.21/2008 by the first respondent is quashed. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his custody is required in connection with any other case or cause.