AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sathasivam, J.—The detenu, who is detained as ''Goonda'', as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of
Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of
1982), by impugned proceedings dated 06.09.2004, challenges the same in this Petition.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, at the foremost, projected that in the absence of imminent possibility of coming out on bail by the
detenu, the Detaining Authority has committed an error in passing the impugned detention order.
In order to appreciate the said contention, we verified paragraph No.4 of the grounds of detention. The verification shows that though the
Detaining Authority was aware of the fact that the detenu is in remand, however, having found that so far he has not moved any bail application, in
the absence of other materials, he has merely concluded that "".. there is possibility of his coming out on bail for the above case since the Sessions
Court and Higher Courts granted bails in similar cases. .."". We are satisfied that the Detaining Authority has not considered two relevant factors,
viz., (a) ""such release was likely"", and (b) ""that it was imminent"". Similar view has been taken by us in the order passed in HCP Nos. 129, 156,
206 & 342 of 2005, dated 27.06.2005. On this ground, the impugned order of detention is liable to be 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.