SAMUNDEESWARI Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME, PROHIBITION & EXCISE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, mother of the detenu Vigneshkumar @ Babuji, son of Jeevagan, aged 20 years, challenges the impugned order of detention, dated 10.11.2017 in C.No.69/G/IS/2017 detaining her son as "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of 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 14/1982).

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.

(3.) Though several grounds have been raised in the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, confines his argument only in respect of non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in passing the order of detention. Further, the detenu was arrested in the ground case on 23.09.2017 ; whereas the Detention order was passed on 10.11.2017, i.e., after a lapse of one and half months. This inordinate delay in passing of detention order would vitiate the same. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court reported in 2005 MLJ (Crl.) 752 (Ramesh v. District Collector and District Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli District and another) . Hence, on the above grounds, the detention order is liable to be set aside.