IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30.1.2008 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.REGUPATHI H.C.P.No.1804 of 2007 Jayavel .. Petitioner Vs 1. The Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Government of Tamilnadu Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2. The District Magistrate & District Collector Kanchipuram District Kanchipuram. .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of Writ of Habeas Corpus as stated therein. For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Balaji For Respondents : Mr.N.R.Elango Addl. Public Prosecutor O R D E R (Made by P.D.DINAKARAN,J.) The petitioner, who is the brother of the detenu, Elango, son of Chinna Kulandai, who was incarcerated by order dated 7.12.2007 of the second respondent 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, seeks a writ of Habeas Corpus to call for the records in connection with the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 7.12.2007 in BDFGISSV/76/2007 detaining his brother, now confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, to set aside the same and to direct the respondents to produce the above said detenu before this Court and set him at liberty. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. On 6.11.2007, the detenu was found selling illicit arrack to some persons at Amman Koil Kulam near Eswarankuttai at Thimmasamudram village. The Sub Inspector of Police, B4 Baluchetty Chatram Police Station apprehended the detenu and seized the illicit arrack found therein. The samples were sent for chemical analysis and it was found that the arrack contained 8.5% mg atropine per 100 ml. A case was registered in Crime No.398/2007 under Sections 4(1)(i), 4(1)(aaa) and 4 (1-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act r/w Rules 6 and 11 of the Rectified Spirit Rules. 3. The second respondent, taking note of the above case as a ground case and finding that there are five adverse cases pending against the detenu in Crime Nos.72, 122 and 197 of 2007 on the file of B4 Baluchetty Chatram Police Station and Crime Nos.353 and 466 of 2007 on the file of Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Kanchipuram for the offence punishable under Section 4(1)(aaa), 4(1-A) of the Tamilnadu Prohibition Act r/w Rules 6 and 11 of the Rectified Spirit Rules and having satisfied that there is a compelling necessity to detain the detenu in order to prevent him from indulging in the activities which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and public health, ordered his detention dubbing him as a bootlegger. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner inviting our attention to the grounds of detention wherein it is stated that four samples were sent for chemical analysis and the report of the Chemical Analyst stating that three samples were analysed, contends that the discrepancy in number of samples sent for chemical analysis would vitiate the impugned order of detention 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. In the grounds of detention, it is stated that the Scientific Assistant and Assistant Chemical Analyst, Tamil Nadu Forensic Science Department, Prohibition Wing, Chepauk, Chennai-5 has issued an analysis report stating that on analysis the four samples were found to contain atropine. However, the chemical analysis report dated 13.11.2007 found at page 101 of the booklet shows that only three bottles were analysed. The error apparent on the face of the record with respect to the number of samples sent for chemical analysis reflects the non application of mind. Hence, we are satisfied that the impugned order of detention is vitiated. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6. In view of the above, the impugned order of detention dated 7.12.2007 is set aside. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other case. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ATR To 1. The Secretary to Government Home, Prohibition and Excise Department Government of Tamilnadu Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai-9. 2. The District Magistrate & District Collector Kanchipuram District. 3. The Superintendent Central Prison Puzhal, Chennai. 4. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai -9. 5. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. 1 cc To Mr.M.Balaji, Advocate, SR.4475. H.C.P.No.1804 of 2007 MDR(CO) RVL 18.02.2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/