Selvi vs State of Tamil Nadu and Another

V. Dhanapalan, J.—The petitioner is the wife of the detenu, who has been branded as a ""Goonda"" as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu

Act 14 of 1982 and detained under order of the second respondent passed in BDFGISSV No. 90 of 2013 dated 29.03.2013. The detenu came

to adverse notice in the following cases:--

The alleged ground case has been registered against the detenu on 24.02.2013, by the Special Sub-Inspector of Police, E-4 Abiramapuram Police

Station, in Crime No. 231 of 2013 for offences under Sections 341, 353, 336, 427, 307 and 506(ii) IPC. Aggrieved by the order of detention,

the present writ petition has been filed.

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other grounds to assail the impugned order of detention, he mainly focussed his

argument on the ground that the detaining authority has taken into consideration the representation of the Sponsoring Authority that the relatives of

the accused are taking steps to take him on bail by filing another bail application in respect of one adverse case and the ground case. The learned

counsel for the petitioner also submits that there is no material to support such finding and therefore, the detention order is to be quashed.

We have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the above point and perused the materials available on record.

On a careful scrutiny of the impugned order, it is seen that the detaining authority, on the presumption that the relatives of the accused are taking

steps to bail him out without any valid material in support thereof, has passed the impugned order of detention in a mechanical manner, which really

shows the non application of mind on the part of detaining authority. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the impugned detention order cannot be

sustained.

Accordingly, the impugned detention order passed by the second respondent, detaining the detenu, namely, Murugan (a) Nondi Murugan, S/o.

Kesavan made in BDFGISSV No. 90 of 2013 dated 29.03.2013, is quashed and the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The above named

detenu is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his custody is required in connection with any other case. The present order is only for the

purpose of disposal of this petition and shall not have any bearing upon connected criminal pending cases.