MARIAMMAL Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the order of the detention, the mother of the detenu has filed the petition. The detenu was detained by the second respondent Commissioner of Police by his detention order No.05/NSA/2008 dated 28.11.2008, under Section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (Central Act 65/1980) read with the order issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.1170/Public (Law and Order - F) Department, dated 10.10.2008 under Sub Section (3) of Section 3 of the said Act.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has urged and stressed five grounds in support of his stand to show that the detention order is vitiated. According to him there is no disturbance to public order. So, the stand of the detaining authority that the detenu has to be detained with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in future is not correct. In support of his contention learned counsel for the petitioner cited the decisions of the Honourable Apex Court in Dipak Rose v. State of W.B. reported in (1973) 4 Supreme Court Cases 43 and in Angoori Devi v. Union of India reported in AIR 1989 SUPREME COURT 371 and argued that there is no disturbance to public order.

(3.) SO far as this case is concerned, learned Additional Public Prosecutor pointed out that it is case of communal class between two groups. One Chellappa was murdered due to property dispute and the detention order would show that the accused and the Chellappa belonged to different communities. As a result of the murder of Chellappa, even the tempo of the life of general public was disrupted at Bharathiyar Street, Tirunelveli Town and surrounding areas. Further the maintenance of public order was disturbed in the whole area. People inhabiting at Bharathiyar street stayed inside their homes fearing danger to their lives. Tense situation prevailed between the particular two caste people in Tirunelveli Town.