- (1.) V . Dhanapalan, J., 1. The petitioner is the mother of detenu. The detenu has been branded as a "Goonda" as contemplated under Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and detained under order of the 2nd respondent passed in Memo No.1411/BDFGISSV/2013 dated 23.10.2013.
(2.) THE detenu came to adverse notice in the following cases: - Sr.No. Police Station and Crime No. Sections of Law 1. H -4, Korukkupet Police Station, Crime No.485 of 2013 Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 385 and 506(ii) IPC 2. P -1, Pulianthope Police Station, Crime No.1736 of 2013 Sections 341, 323, 385 and 506(ii) IPC 3. H -4, Korukkupet Police Station, Crime No.500 of 2013 Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 384, 427, 336, 307 and 506(ii) IPC 4. H -1, Washermenpet Police Station, Crime No.981 of 2013 Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 384 and 506(ii) IPC The ground case alleged against the detenu is one registered on 01.10.2013 by the Inspector of Police, H -4, Korukkupet Police Station in Crime No.519 of 2013 for offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 384, 427, 336, 307 and 506(ii) IPC. Aggrieved by the order of detention, the present petition has been filed. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other grounds to assail the order of detention, he has mainly focused his argument on the ground that there is a delay in disposal of the representation dated 18.11.2013, which is violative of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and therefore, on this sole ground alone, the detention order is liable to be quashed.
(3.) WE have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the above submission.;