9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (6) TMI 590X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant is the wife of one Selvam who has been detained as a Goonda under Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982. The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, on being satisfied that Selvam was involved in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and with a view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he sponsoring authority on 21.10.97. The sponsoring authority gave its remarks on 24.10.97 and they were forwarded by the Commissioner of Police to the Government on 28.10.97. The representation was rejected by the Government on 10.11.97. The State Government was required to explain how it dealt with the representation between 15.10.97 and 10.11.97. Except stating that it called for the remarks of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplain satisfactorily that it had dealt with the representation to the detenu as promptly as possible. It appears that oblivious of the correct legal position and its obligations in matters of preventive detention it has dealt with the representation of the detenu in a routine manner. This indifference of the Government is the cause for rendering the continued detention of the detenu illegal. We, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nexplained becomes unreasonable. In spite of this well-settled legal position the State Government has failed to explain satisfactorily that it had dealt with the representation of the detenu as promptly as possible. It appears that oblivious of the correct legal position and its obligations in matters of preventive detention it has dealt with the representation of the detenu in a routine manner. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
