AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sathasivam, J.—The petitioner herein challenges the order of detention, dated 11.02.2006, detaining her husband by name Nagaraj as
''Bootlegger'' as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders,
Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
At the foremost, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the detenu was not supplied with the relied on documents, which vitiates the
ultimate order of detention. By taking us through para No. 5 of the grounds of detention, learned counsel contended that though the Detaining
Authority mentioned the details regarding the bail petition filed before the District Court as well as this Court, copies of those documents were not
supplied to the detenu, which prevented him from making effective representation, and also infringed the right given to him under Article 22(5) of
the Constitution.
On going through the specific reference made in paragraph No. 5 relating to the orders passed by the District Court and this Court as well as
pendency of Criminal Original Petition to enlarge the detenu on bail, we are of the view that those documents were heavily relied on by the
Detaining Authority before arriving at the subjective satisfaction as regards the detenu''s coming out on bail. In such circumstances, we hold that
failure to supply those documents vitiates the ultimate detention order.
Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the impugned order of detention is set aside. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty
forthwith from the custody unless he is required in some other case or cause.