IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:- 22.10.2010 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.S. KARNAN H.C.P. No.1567 of 2010 Ananthan ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Stateof Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department., Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Police, Chennai – 600 008. ... Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the entire records related to the petitioner's detention under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 vide detention order dated 23.4.2010 on the file of the second respondent herein made in proceedings Nos.226/2010, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to produce the petitioner namely Ananthan, Son of Sankar, aged 21 years before this Court and set the petitioner at liberty from detention now petitioner detained at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 06. For Petitioner : Mr. C.C. Chellappan For Respondents : Mr. M. Babu Muthu Meeran, Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by M. CHOCKALINGAM,J) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ This petition is brought forth by the detenu himself challenging the order of the second respondent in proceedings Nos.226/2010 dated 23.4.2010, whereby he was ordered to be detained as a Goonda under the provisions of the Act 14 of 1982. 2. The Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and looked into the materials available on record, in particular, the order under challenge. 3. It is not in controversy that pursuant to the recommendation made by the Sponsoring Authority that the detenu is involved in three adverse cases viz. (i) Crime No.190 of 2010 registered by K-8 Arumbakkam Police Station for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code; (ii) Crime No.293 of 2010 registered by K-4 Anna Nagar Police Station for the offences under Sections 384 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code; (iii) Crime No.382 of 2010 registered by K-3 Aminjikarai Police Station for the offences under Sections 384 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code and one ground case in Crime No.194 of 2010 registered by K-8 Arumbakkam police station for the offences under Sections 341, 336, 427, 397 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code for the incident that had taken place on 27.3.2010 and the detenu was arrested on the very day, the Detaining Authority, on scrutiny of materials placed, passed the detention order, after arriving at the subjective satisfaction that the activities of the detenu were prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court. 4. The only contention put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the detenu has not filed any bail application in anyone of the adverse cases and the ground case. But the Authority has observed that there was a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. The said observation is without any basis. 5. This Court heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the above contentions and paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made. 6. As could be seen from the available materials, the Detaining Authority has made the order of detention terming the detenu as a Goonda, on the strength of the materials placed before him pertaining to three adverse cases and one ground case as referred to above and has recorded its subjective satisfaction that the activities of the detenu were prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. 7. It is an admitted position that the detenu has not filed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ any bail application in anyone of the adverse cases and the ground case. But the Authority has observed in paragraph 4 of the detention order as follows:- " 4. I am aware that Thiru. Anandan is in remand in K-8 Arumbakkam Police Station Crime Nos.190/2010 and 194/2010 and K-4 Anna Nagar Police Station Crime No.293/2010 and K-3 Aminjikarai police Station Crime No.382/2010 and he has not moved any bail application for K-8 Arumbakkam police Station Crime Nos.190/201 and 194/2010 and K-4 Anna Nagar Police Station Crime No.293/2010 and K-3 Aminjikarai Police Station Crime No.382/2010 so far. The sponsoring authority has stated that the relatives of Thiru. Anandan are taking action to take him on bail by filing bail application for K-8 Arumbakkam Police Station Crime Nos.190/2010 and 194/2010 and K-4 Anna Nagar Police Station Crime No.293/2010 and K-3 Aminjikarai police Station Crime No.382/2010 before the appropriate Court and since in a similar cases registered in K-10 Koyambedu Police Station in Crime No.524/2009 under Section 302 IPC bail was granted by the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.M.P. No.5674/2009. In a similar case registered at V-5 Thirumangalam Police Station Crime No.381/2009 under Sections 147, 448, 384 and 506(ii) IPC and 3(1) TNPP (D&L) Act, bail was granted by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, in Crl.M.P. No.1361/2009, within in 6 days. Similarly, in a case registered under Sections registered under Sections 397 r/w 326 IPC in R-6 Kumaran Nagar Police Station Cr.No.427/2009 bail was granted by the Court of Principal Sessions Judge in Crl.M.P. No.3990/2009 in 9 days. Hence, there is a real possibility of his coming out on bail by filing bail application for K-8 Arumbakkam Police Station Crime Nos.190/2010 and 194/2010 and K-4 Anna Nagar Police Station Crime No.293/2010 and K-3 Aminjikarai Police Station Crime No.382/2010 before the appropriate Court. If he comes out on bail, he will indulge in further activities which will be prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Further the recourse to normal criminal law would not have the desired effect of effectively preventing him from indulging in such activities, which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. On the materials https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ placed before me, I am fully satisfied that Thiru. Anandan is also a Goonda and that there is a compelling necessity to detain him in order to prevent him from involving in such further activities in future which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982." 8. From the above, it is quite clear that the observation of the Detaining Authority is without any material. It is only an expression of the impression in the mind of the Authority and only an inference and that too without any basis or materials much less cogent materials as the law would require. On this ground, the order of detention has got to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed, setting aside the detention order passed by the second respondent in proceedings No.226/2010 dated 23.4..2010. The detenu, namely, Ananthan, who is now confined at Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his custody/detention is required in connection with any other case. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ssa. To 1. The Secretary, The Government of Tamil Nadu, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department., Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai Police, Chennai – 600 008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. 4.The Joint Secretary to Govt. Public (Law & Order) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court,Madras. VS(CO) km/9.11. H.C.P. No.1567 of 2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/