MURUGAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ of habeas corpus has been filed by the petitioner under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for the issurance of a writ of habeas corpus quashing the order of detention passed against him by the second respondent-Commissioner of Police, Madras City on 8. 6. 1987 under sec. 3 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bottleggers, drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act (XIV of 1982) with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

(2.) THE main ground of attack levelled by Mr. Swamidoss manokaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioner was on bail on the date of passing of the order of detention on 8. 6. 1987 and the footnote in the order of detention and in the grounds of detention for service on the detenu through the Superintendent, Central Prison, Madras is not correct and has been mechanically made without proper application of the mind of the detaining authority and the order of detention is vitiated thereby. In reply thereto the second respondent has come forward with this explanation in Par a 6 of the counter affidavit. 'with reference to the ground (d) of paragraph 2 of the affidavit it is submitted that in the ground case the detenu was arrested on 29. 4. 1987 at the spot where he was found selling illicitly distilled arrack and he was remanded by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, ponneri on the same and he was later released on bail. THE order of detention was passed subseqently on 8. 6. 1987 and hence the warrant of arrest was issued along with the detention order. THE detenu was arrested by the Inspector of police, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Redhills on 9. 6. 1987 to execute the warrant issued in the detention case and he was produced before the superintendent, Central Prison, Madras . Hence the fact that the detention order to be served through the superintendent, Central Prison, Madras is not wrong.'