AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sathasivam, J.—The petitioner, who is the mother of the detenu by name Mahi @ Mahendran @ Mahendrakumar, who was detained as
a ""Goonda"" as contemplated u/s 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders,
Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), by the impugned detention
order dated 28.11.2005, challenges the same in this Petition.
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Advocate for the respondents.
At the foremost, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner herein made the pre-detention representation
on 20.11.2005 to the detaining authority, which was duly acknowledged by the said authority on 21.11.2005, the same was not considered while
passing the order of detention, which vitiates the ultimate order passed by him.
The learned Government Advocate on verification of the records, has admitted that though the representation dated 20.11.2005 has been
received, the same was not considered by the detaining authority.
In the light of the admitted factual position and in view of the settled legal position that the pre-detention representation has to be considered by
the detaining authority, since the same was received prior to the passing of the detention order, we are of the view that the impugned detention
order is liable to be quashed and accordingly quashed.
Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned order of detention is set aside. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty
forthwith from the custody unless he is required in some other case or cause.