SELVARAJ Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND THE STATE OF TAMILNADU REP BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein challenges the impugned order of detention, dated 17.6.2008, detaining him as Goonda as contemplated under the Tamilnadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-Leggers, Drug Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act 1982 (Tamilnadu Act 14 of 1982).

(2.) Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the detaining authority, by relying on 4 adverse cases apart from the ground case, clamped the above order of detention on the detenu. Adverting to the ground case, the learned Counsel would submit that the detaining authority wrongly came to a conclusion that it was a case pertaining to maintenance of Public Order. He points out that the alleged occurrence in the ground case took place at 6 a.m. inside the compound of one Rathinapandi's house where the deceased was working as a security from Ajith Security Service, Madurai; that there was no eye-witness to the occurrence; and that, on the next day, another watchman, who came to relieve the deceased, found him dead and made a call to the owner of the house, who in turn reported the incident to the police, resulting in registration of the case. Under such circumstances, the detaining authority has erroneously come to the conclusion that the detenu was habitually acting in the manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and therefore, according to the learned Counsel, the impugned order of detention is liable to be quashed.

(3.) Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned order of detention.