IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 8.1.2008 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.REGUPATHI H.C.P.No.1679 of 2007 Jothi .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamilnadu rep. by Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2. The Commissioner of Police/ Detaining Authority Coimbatore City. .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Habeas Corpus calling for the records relating to the Detention Order C.No.30/G/IS/2007, dated 5.4.2007 passed by the 2nd Respondent under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and quash the same and direct the respondent to produce th detenue S.Nagaraj, Son of Sethupathy now confined in Central Prison, Coimbatore before this Hon'ble Court and set the detenue S.Nagaraj, Son of Sethupathy at liberty as stated therein. For Petitioner : Mr.N.R.Nakeeran For Respondents : Mr.N.R.Elango Addl. Public Prosecutor O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by P.D.DINAKARAN,J.) The second respondent herein clamped an order of detention as against the son of the petitioner – S.Nagaraj/detenu, as the said authority arrived at the subjective satisfaction that the said detenu is a Goonda and he has to be detained under Section 3(1) of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Officers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982). 2. Challenging the abovesaid detention, the mother of the detenu preferred this Habeas Corpus Petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to call for the records of the second respondent vide C.No.30/G/IS/2007, dated 5.4.2007, to quash the same and to consequently, direct his production before this Court and to set him at liberty. 3.1. The order of detention dated 3.4.2007 was passed on the basis of ground case in Crime No.294 of 2007 on the file of Saibaba Colony Police Station for alleged commission of offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, complaint of which was given by one Shanmugam. The allegation against the detenu was that on 12.3.2007 at 1100 hours, while he was going on Thadagam Road in a bicycle, the detenu waylaid him and demanded money, when the complainant questioned, the detenu took out a knife and snatched Rs.150/- from his pocket. When the complainant and others tried to catch the detenu, he brandished knife and threatened to kill anybody who approaches him. On seeing their atrocious activities, people ran helter shelter. On the complaint of the said Shanmugam, a crime, as stated above, was registered and pursuant to the investigation, the detenu was arrested. 3.2. That apart, the detaining authority also took note of the three adverse cases pending against the detenu, viz., Crime Nos.2178, 2209 and 2285 of 2005 on the file of Salem City, Pallapatty Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 379 and 399 of the Indian Penal Code 3.3. Considering these activities of the detenu are prejudicial to maintenance of public order, the detaining authority passed the impugned order. The detenu was declared as an “Goonda" and was kept in custody at Central Prison, Coimbatore. 4. Mr.N.R.Nakeeran, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of detention was passed by the second respondent mechanically, even before formulating the grounds of detention. To substantiate the said contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the order of detention is dated 3.4.2007, whereas the grounds of detention were formulated only on 5.4.2007. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. We have perused the records produced before us. It is apparent on the face of the records that the grounds of detention were formulated only on 5.4.2007, whereas the order of detention was passed on 3.4.2007, which, in our considered opinion, is not possible. Therefore, even before the formulation of the grounds of detention, the detention order was passed, which vitiates the order of detention. For the aforesaid reason, we are inclined to allow this petition. Even though there is an error in the prayer as to the date of the detention order, from the records, it is apparent that the detention order is dated 3.4.2007 and not 5.4.2007. The order of detention dated 3.4.2007 is quashed. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other case. Sasi Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. To: 1.The Secretary to Government Prohibition and Excise Department State of Tamilnadu Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2.The Commissioner of Police Coimbatore City. 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 4.The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9. 5.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. Svn (co) dv/24.1. H.C.P.No.1679 of 2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/