BABU Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the detenu. He was detained under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Forest-offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), by order of the second respondent made in No.24/BDFGISSV/2009 dated 20.04.2009, by branding him as a 'GOONDA'.

(2.) THERE are four adverse cases and one ground case as against the detenu. The details of the adverse cases are as under:- TABLE The ground case was registered under Sections 392 r/w 397 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.287 of 2009 on the file of C2 Subramaniapuram (Crime) Police Station. In the ground case, the detenu was arrested on 05.03.2009 and sent to judicial custody on the same day and thereafter his remand was extended upto 30.04.2009. The detention order was clamped on the detenu on 20.04.2009.

(3.) THE subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority that the detenu will come out on bail by filing bail applications, is not based on any material on record and it is only a presumption. THErefore, the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority as regards the real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail, has not been established properly. In the case of K.Thirupathi v. District Magistrate and District Collector, reported in 2005-2-L.W.(Crl.)946, a Full Bench of this Court has held that there must be cogent material before the Authority passing the detention order for inferring that the detenu was likely to be released on bail; this inference must be drawn from material on record and must not be the ipse dixit of the Authority passing the detention order. In the present case the Detaining Authority has passed the order only on presumption that there was real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail and absolutely there is no material to arrive at such conclusion. Having tested the present case in the light of the above Full Bench decision of this Court, we are of the considered view that the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority as regards the real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail, is not established properly and accordingly, the detention order is liable to be set aside on this ground.