Yuvaraj @ Eral vs The State of Tamil Nadu

P. Sathasivam, J.—The petitioner who was detained as ""Goonda"" under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 by the impugned proceedings dated

11-8-2005, challenges the same in this petition.

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

Learned counsel for the petitioner by drawing our attention to averments in para 4 of the grounds of detention, submitted that in the absence of

bail petition before the Court concerned, the detaining authority is not correct in arriving at a conclusion that there is imminent possibility of the

detenu coming out on bail. According to him, this shows non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority; hence its ultimate order is

liable to be quashed. We have verified paragraph 4 of the grounds of detention and we are unable to accept the said contention for the following

reasons. It is clear that the detaining authority was aware of the fact that the detenu, namely, Yuvaraj Eral was in remand in J9 Thuraipakkam

Police Station Crime No. 433/2005 and also noted the fact that he has not moved any bail petition so far. In the absence of any bar in filing bail

petition, the detaining authority after noting that by filing bail petition, it would be possible for the detenu coming out on bail and after satisfying his

earlier activities as well as other relevant materials and finding that if he comes out on bail, he will indulge in further activities, which will be

prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, passed the impugned order. We do not find any error or flaw in the said conclusion. Except the

above said contention, no other points have been urged; consequently the Habeas Corpus Petition fails and the same is dismissed.