VIMALA ALIAS SHILPA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein challenges the impugned order of detention dated 03.10.2008 detaining her as an 'Immoral Traffic Offender' as contemplated under 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.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the detention order dated 03.10.2008 is liable to be set aside on the following grounds:

(3.) ON perusing the documents found in the typed set of papers, as pointed out by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, it is clear that the detenue herself mentioned the name of her husband in the representation dated 25.10.2008 as well as in the bail application, only as 'Adhisesh' and not as 'Prasad'. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has given much importance to the confession statement given by the detenue to the police officer stating that she is the wife of Prasad. But, on going through the said statement, we found that the detenue had stated that 'Prasad' accepted her as his 'wife". But in our opinion, the said statement cannot be taken as an assertive statement. ON the other hand, the said statement goes to prove that there is no legal relationship of husband and wife between the said Prasad and the detenue and there is only a living-in relationship between them. Under such circumstances, we are not inclined to accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is a vital contradiction in mentioning the name of the husband by the detaining authority in the detention order.