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.1662 of 2007 Selvam .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamilnadu rep. by the Secretary to Government Prohibition & Excise Department Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2. The District Collector and District Magistrate Coimbatore District Coimbatore. .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Habeas Corpus as stated therein. For Petitioner : Ms.R.Subadra Devi 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 brother-in-law of the petitioner – Ravi alias Ravikannan, 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 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). https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.1. The order of detention dated 8.9.2007 was passed on the basis of the ground case in Crime No.1026 of 2007 under Section 394 IPC on the file of Tirupur North Police Station, complaint of which was given by one Karthikeyan. According to the complainant, on 11.8.2007 at about 1830 hours, he and one Balakrishnan went to Municipal Park. In the absence of the said Balakrishnan, the detenu came near to the complainant and demanded money and as he refused, the detenu took out a knife and robbed Rs.130/- and writ watch. On seeing this, Balakrishnan and other passers tried to apprehend the accused, but the detenu threatened to stab them. The public frightened resulting the traffic and vehicles plying on the road coming to a stand still and a panic situation was created. Based on the said complaint, investigation was done and the detenu was arrested and remanded. 2.2. The detaining authority also took note of nine adverse cases pending against the detenu, viz., Crime Nos.1511 of 1997 and 544 of 2007 on the file of Tiruppur South Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 457, 380, 324 and 506(ii) IPC; Crime No. 285 of 2002 on the file of Anupparpalayam Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 457 and 380 IPC; Crime Nos.428 of 2003, 218 and 804 of 2007 on the file of Tiruppur North Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 307 IPC and 20(1)(b) of the NDPS Act; Crime Nos.193 and 194 of 2006 on the file of Mangalam Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC; and Crime No.205 of 2007 on the file of Perumanallur Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 342 and 324 IPC. 2.3. The detaining authority, having satisfied that the detenu is indulging in activities which are prejudicial to maintenance of public order, passed the impugned order. 3. Challenging the said detention, the brother-in-law of the detenu has come forward with the present Habeas Corpus Petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to call for the entire records leading to the detention of the detenu, vide detention order dated 8.9.2007 on the file of the second respondent made in proceedings Cr.M.P.No.9/G/2007/E4, to quash the same and to consequently direct the respondents to produce the body and person of the said detenu, now confined in Central Prison, Coimbatore, before this Court and to set him at liberty. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.R.Elango, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. The only contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per the first information report the complainant was assaulted by the detenu, but in the doctor certificate which was issued at a subsequent time, it is stated that the complainant was assaulted by unknown persons and this discrepancy clearly shows the non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority and therefore, the order of detention is vitiated. 6. We have perused the materials available on record. The ground case occurred on 11.8.2007 at about 1830 hours. The first information report was given on 11.8.2007 at 1930 hours on the file of Tirupur North Police Station. In the first information report it has been stated that the complainant was assaulted by the detenu. But, in the doctor certificate dated 11.8.2007 issued at 2030 hours, found at page 281 of the booklet, it is mentioned that the complainant was assaulted by unknown persons. The above discrepancy was not properly appreciated by the detaining authority. This, in our considered, reflects the total non- application of mind on the part of the detaining authority. For the reason aforesaid, this petition must succeed and the same is ordered as prayed for. The detention order dated 8.9.2007 is set aside. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his custody is required in connection with any other case. Sasi Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar To: 1. The Secretary to Government State of Tamilnadu Prohibition and Excise Department Fort St.George, Chennai – 9. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The District Collector and District Magistrate Coimbatore District Coimbatore. 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 4. The Joint Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Public (Law and Order) Department, Fort St George, Chennai 9. 5. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. • 1 cc to Mr. R. Subadra Devi, Advocate SR No. 1333 SR(CO)' SR/25.1.2008 H.C.P.No.1662 of 2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/