Ranjith vs The Secretary to the Government, Prohibition and Excise Department and The District Magistrate cum District Collector

P. Sathasivam, J.—The petitioner, who is the friend of the detenu by name Senguttuvan, who was detained as a ''Goonda'' 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), by the impugned detention order dated 30.06.2005, challenges the same in this Petition.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

It is not in dispute that this is the second petition challenging the very same order. Though in the earlier petition viz.,HCP No. 755 of 2005, several contentions have been raised and this Court, after meeting the same, dismissed the same, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the details furnished in the grounds does not show that there was public order warranting invocation of Act 14 of 1 982.

In the light of the said contention, we verified the earlier order passed on 8.11.2005 in HCP No. 755 of 2005 as well as necessary averments in the grounds of detention. Verification of those details amply show that on 15.06.2005 at about 15.30 hours at old bus stand, Villupuram, the detenu and his associates holding a Veecharuval and on seeing the police party headed by Balasubramanian, Sub Inspector of Police, threatened that "we are going to murder those policemen". When the police party attempted to stop them, the detenu and his associates tried to cut the head of the Sub Inspector of Police and the cut fell on his right hand and caused an injury. When the police party attempted to catch hold of them, the detenu and his associates wielded Veecharuval and shouted (sic) and also picked soda bottles from the nearby shops, brooked those bottles on the ground and thereby caused alarm and terror in the minds of the public gathered around there. The shop owners downed the shutters; the driver of the buses ran away and the general public ran for safety. The grounds further proceed that taking advantage of the chaotic condition, the detenu and his associates escaped by running away. Based on the Special Report from the Sub Inspector of Police, the Inspector of Police, Villupuram West had registered a case in Crime No. 377/2005 u/s 147, 148, 294, 427, 332, 341 and 307 IPC read with 25(b) of Arms Act against the detenu and his associates. Taking note of his involvement in other cases as well as the ground occurrence on 15.06.2005, after satisfying himself that in order to maintain public peace and public order, by invoking Section 14 of the Act, 1982, detained him as a "Goonda".

In such circumstances, it cannot be claimed that there is no public order.

On the other hand, we are satisfied that the detaining authority, after considering all the relevant materials, including the issue relating to the public order, passed the detention order. We find no merit in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Except the above said contention, no other points have been urged. Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition fails and the same is dismissed.