IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 7.11.2007 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.REGUPATHI H.C.P.No.1128 of 2007 Vasuki .. Petitioner Vs 1. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Secretary Prohibition and Excise Department Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009. 2. The District Magistrate and District Collector Villupuram District Villupuram. .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of Writ of Habeas Corpus as stated therein. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vadivel Murugan For Respondents: Mr.Babu Muthu Meeran Addl. Public Prosecutor O R D E R (Made by P.D.DINAKARAN,J.) The petitioner is the wife of detenu Kannan. The detenu was clamped with an order of detention dated 23.7.2007 under the provisions of 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 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982) branding him as a Bootlegger and he is now confined at Central Prison, Cuddalore. Hence, the wife of the detenu seeks a writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in connection with the said order of detention in Ref.No.C2/31801/2007, to set aside the same and to direct the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The Inspector of Police, Kallakurichi Prohibition Enforcement Wing conducted prohition raid in Vilambavoor Village on 8.7.2007. At that time, he found the detenu pouring some liquid in a glass tumbler from a white colour plastic can and giving the same to a person. He caught the detenu and seized a can of 6 litres arrack and two lorry tubes containing 55 litres of arrack. A case was registered in Crime No.998/2007 on the file of Kallakurichi Prohibition Enforcement Wing under Sections 4(1)(A), 4(1)(aaa) read with 4(1)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. The chemical analysis report of the samples taken from the arrack seized from the detenue disclosed that the arrack contained atropine of 3.47 mgms per 100 ml. 3. The second respondent, taking note of the above case as a ground case and finding that there are five adverse cases in crime Nos.843/2006, 937/2006, 397/2007, 455/2007 and 481/2007 on the file of Kallakurichi Prohibition Enforcement Wing for the offence under Sections 4(1)(a) and 4 (1-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, ordered his detention dubbing as a bootlegger. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, inviting our attention to para 5 of the grounds of detention wherein it is stated that the detenu was in remand in connection with the ground case and three adverse cases, contends that there is no valid remand on the date of passing of the impugned order of detention and therefore, the order of detention is vitiated on the ground of non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority. 5. We have perused the entire materials placed before us. A perusal of the same makes it clear that the detaining authority had stated that the detenu is in remand in connection with the ground case as well as three adverse cases. However, in the request for remand found at page No.76 of the booklet, it is stated by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kallakurichi that on 20.7.2007, "the accused not produced, to be produced on 3.8.2007". Therefore, it is clear that on the date of passing of the order of detention, the detenu was not in valid remand. The above discrepancy, which went unnoticed by the detaining authority while passing the order of detention, reflects his non application of mind. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6. We are, therefore, satisfied that the impugned order of detention is vitiated on the ground of non application of mind on the part of detaining authority. Hence, the order of detention is quashed. The habeas corpus petition is allowed. The detenu is directed to be released forthwith, unless he is required in connection with any other case. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar kpl To 1. The Secretary to Government Prohibition & Excise Department Secretariat, Chennai 9. 2. The District Magistrate and District Collector Villupuram District Villupuram. 3. The Superintendent Central Prison, Cuddalore. 4. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. HCP No.1128 of 2007. VSV(CO) RVL 29.11.2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/