S.RABIYA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the mother of the detenu and challenge is made to the impugned order of detention dated 22.12.2018, passed by the 2nd respondent under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982) branding the detenu as 'Drug Offender' with a view to preventing him from acting prejudicial to the interest of public health and public order. Aggrieved by the said order, the present petition has been filed.

(2.) A perusal of the grounds of detention disclose that the impugned order of detention came to be passed on a solitary incident. The grounds of detention further reads that on 2.10.18, at about 05.00 hours, the Inspector of Police attached to NIB CID Unit received secret information, which ws recorded at 05.15 hours in the General Diary and after informing the same to the immediate official superiors, the Special Sub Inspector of Police along with the police party reached near Iyangar Bakery situate at bye-pass road, Nagamalaipudukottai and mounted surveillance and at about 06.45 hours on 2.10.18, they saw a white colour Toyota Etios car, bearing Regn. No.KL 29 K 7640 , which was stopped and the persons travelling in the said car were also enquired into and they revealed their identities as Ashwin (detenu) and Vishal.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for revoking the order of detention, post-dated representation dated 11.1.19 was submitted and it was dealt with by the Home, Prohibition & Excise (IX) Dept. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to column Nos.7 to 9 and 12 & 13 of the proforma and submits that even excluding the public holidays between column Nos.6 and 9, there was a delay of 20 days between column Nos.12 and 13, there is a delay of 45 days in dealing with the said representation and in the absence of any proper or tenable explanation, such a delay is fatal to the impugned order and, hence, prays for quashment of the detention order.