SANGEETHA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR VELLORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the correctness of the order of detention, dated 30.06.2008, passed by the first respondent, wife of the detenu has filed this Habeas Corpus Petition.

(2.) AS per the order of detention passed by the first respondent, it is seen that there are two adverse cases pending against the detenu. The first case was registered in Cr.No.652 of 2008 on the file of the Vellore Civil Supplies CID Unit under Rule 6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 r/w Section 7 (1) (a) (ii) of E.C Act, 1955 and Section 403 IPC. AS per the first ground case, 227 bags of PDS rice, each containing approximately 50 Kgs were seized from the detenu and others under a cover of mahazar and the case is under investigation. AS per the second adverse case registered in Cr.No.975 of 2008 on the file of the Vellore Civil Supplies CID Unit under Rule 6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 r/w Section 7 (1) (a) (ii) of E.C Act, 1955 and Sections 403 and 420 IPC, the petitioner was allegedly transporting 50 bags of PDS rice on 16.06.2008 and it is also under investigation.

(3.) THE petitioner has challenged the detention order on the ground that there are lapses in the order, apart from non-application of mind, which would vitiate the detention order. THE petitioner has further stated that the detaining authority had not furnished the typed set along with the detention order. Though the detention order was passed on 30.06.2008, the paper book containing details about the ground case was furnished to the detenu only on 05.07.2008 and there is a delay of six days in furnishing the paper book. According to the petitioner, in the typed set some of the pages containing details in English could not be understood by the detenu and the translated Tamil version of some of the papers were not furnished to the detenu. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not specifically pointed out any such defective translation. THE petitioner has also disputed the genuineness of the confession statement, said to have been given by the detenu and recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 24.06.2008. THE bail petition filed by the detenu in Cr.M.P.No.5078 of 2008 before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Vellore was dismissed as early as on 03.07.2008, after hearing both sides. THE petitioner has further submitted that the case was registered only for the purpose of detaining the husband of the petitioner under Act 7 of 1980.