JUDGEMENT
R.THARANI, J. -
(1.)The petitioner is the detenu viz., Manimaran, aged about 36 years, son of Jeyabalan. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent by his
detention order in Cr.M.P.No.24 of 2021 (Goonda) dtd. 30/12/2021, holding him
to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Sec. 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of
1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
(2.)We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also
perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority.
(3.)Though several grounds have been raised in the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would mainly focus his argument
on the ground that there is gross violation of procedural safeguards, which would
vitiate the detention. The learned counsel, by placing authorities, submitted that
the representation made by the petitioner was not considered on time and there
was an inordinate and unexplained delay.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.