C KARRUPPAYEE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the mother of the detenu Dhanasekar. She challenges an order of the second respondent made in No.31/BDFGISSV/2010 dated 7.3.2010, whereby her son was ordered to be detained under Act 14/82 branding him as a Goonda.

(2.) The Court heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The Court also looked into the materials available including the grounds of detention.

(3.) Pursuant to the recommendations made by the sponsoring authority that the detenu is involved in five adverse cases namely (1) E5 Sholavaram PS Cr.No.776/2009 under Sections 147, 148, 341, 302 IPC r/w 149 IPC r/w 120(b) IPC r/w 109 IPC; (2) M5 Ennore PS Cr.No.394/2009 under Sec.302 r/w 120(b) IPC; (3) M5 Ennore PS Cr.No.64/2010 under Sections 364, 384 and 506(ii) IPC; (4) M5 Ennore PS Cr.No.65/2010 under Sections 364, 384 and 506(ii) IPC and (5) M7 Manali New Town PS Cr.No.19/2010 under Sections 294(b), 384 and 506(ii) IPC, and also in one ground case registered by M7 Manali New Town PS Cr.No.26/2010 under Sections 341, 294(b), 336, 384, 506(ii) and 397 IPC for an occurrence that took place on 4.3.2010, and he was arrested on the very day and remanded to judicial custody, the detaining authority after scrutiny of the materials placed, formed an opinion that the detenu should be detained under Act 14/82 and hence passed the order which is under challenge.