SEKAR REPORTER

Counter filed by police commissioner Sandeep Rai Rathore, I.P.S.in savuku sanker HCP

Sekar Reporter
FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS.
Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
H.C.P. No. 1163 of 2024
Against
No. 495/BCDFGISSSV/2024.

A. Kamala, (68/F),
W/o. Achimuthu,
No.12/6, Sector II,
T.N.H.B. Flats,
Maduravoyal, Chennai,
Tamil Nadu – 600 095. ……. Petitioner/ Mother of the Detenue

               -Vs-
  1. The State Rep. by Secretary to Government,
    Home, Prohibition and Excuse Department,
    Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
  2. The Commissioner of Police,
    Greater Chennai, Chennai.
  3. The Inspector of Police,
    Chennai City CCD-1,
    Chennai.
  4. The Superintendent,
    Central Prison, Puzhal,
    Coimbatore. ……. Respondents

COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

I, Sandeep Rai Rathore, I.P.S., S/o. Jagdish Rai Rathore, Indian, aged 56 years, Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows:
1. I respectfully submit that I am working as Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police. I am well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the Petition from available records. I am duly authorized to file this Counter Affidavit for the second respondent and also for the first respondent. It is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to accept this Counter Affidavit filed by me before this Hon’ble Court.
2. I respectfully submit that the Petition is false, frivolous, vexatious and not maintainable either in law or on facts of the case. The averments contained in the affidavit filed in support of the Petition are hereby denied as false and incorrect. The averments made in Paragraphs 1 to 4 of the affidavit, are ingredients of the Petition. I have read the averments made in the affidavit and deny all the averments except those averments that are specifically admitted herein.

  1. I respectfully submit that the Petitioner’s son Detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar has been detained under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 as Goonda in Detention order No.495/BCDFGISSSV/2024 dated:12.05.2024 and the detenu is presently under detention at the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.
    1. I respectfully submit that the Petitioner/mother of the detenu has raised several untenable grounds in her affidavit filed in support of her Petition and prays to vitiate the detention order passed by the second respondent. I wish to state that the grounds raised by the Petitioner are not germane to the case in hand and are liable to be dismissed as devoid of merit. I respectfully submit the second respondent has passed an order of detention in 495/BCDFGISSSV/2024, Dated:12.05.2024 as against the petitioner. I further submit that the first respondent herein by his letter No.7953/H, P&E(XIII)/ 2024, dated:24.05.2024 has made a reference to the Advisory Board in accordance with the provisions of section 10 of the Act 14 of 1982. I further submit that the opinion of the Advisory Board is pending in such circumstances without availing such statutory remedy, the petitioner has approached this Hon’ble Court and hence this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
    2. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(5) of the affidavit are incorrect and denied as false. The Government or the Police Officers do not have any personal vendetta against the detenu. The Detaining Authority/Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, has relied upon the two adverse cases registered in (i) Chennai City, Cyber Crime Division-I Crime No. 154/2024 u/s. 294(b), 354D, 506(i), 509 of IPC and Section 4 of the T.N.P.H.W. (Amendment) Act, 2002 on 07.05.2024 at 18.00 hours on the complaint of Tmt. Sandhya Ravishankar for the allegation of publishing an article on 27.08.2018 making obscene and willfully false allegations against her amounting to character assassination and harassed her and (ii) Chennai City, Central Crime Division-I Crime No.155/2024 u/s. 294(b) and 506(i) IPC on 06.05.2024 on the complaint of Tmt. Veeralakshmi for the allegation against the Detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar of levelling demeaning, insulting and also threatened the Police personnel in an interview given by Thiru Savukku Shankar to Thiru Felix, a media person, which was published in Youtube on 30.04.2024 as well as the ground case registered on 08.05.2024 in Chennai City Police, Cyber Crime P.S., Central Crime Branch in Crime No.158/2024 u/s.465, 466, 471, 474 and 420 of IPC on the complaint Thiru Balamurugan, Superintending Engineer-I (FAC), Constructing Wing, C.M.D.A., E-Road, Tower-III Koyambedu, Chennai -107 for the detention of the Detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar as Goonda under preventive detention. From Jan 2, 2024, to February 28, 2024, various agitations were conducted by the public under the influence of the detenu’s videos related to the ground case in Cr.No.158/2024 regarding the Kilambakkam Bus Stand issue. Subsequently, several people, including advocates and the public, raged against the detenu when he was brought to the courts at Coimbatore, Madurai, Trichy and Chennai in connection with the second adverse case in Cr.No.155/2024. After careful perusal of the records and material evidences and after making his own independent assessment of the case of the detenu and after coming to a subjective satisfaction and a well-considered decision to detain the detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar as Goonda under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. In order to prevent the detenu from indulging in such criminal activities, he was detained as Goonda on 12.05.2024 under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.
    3. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(6) of the affidavit is not correct. I further submit that during the course of the investigation of the ground case in Chennai City Police Cyber Crime P.S., Central Crime Branch in Crime No. 158/2024 u/s. 465, 466, 471, 474 and 420 IPC, the Inspector of Police received information that Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar was arrested by the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime P.S., Coimbatore City in Crime No.123/2024 u/s.509 IPC and Section 4 of the T.N.P.H.W. (Amendment) Act, 2002 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act on 04.05.2024 and produced before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No. IV, Coimbatore on 04.05.2024 and remanded to Judicial custody till 19.05.2024 and lodged at Central Prison, Coimbatore.
    4. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(7) of the affidavit is not correct. During the course of the investigation of the ground case in CCB CCD-I Crime No.158/2024, the Sponsoring authority, after obtaining necessary permission from the Learned Judicial Magistrate No. IV, Coimbatore, and formally arrested Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar on 10.04.2024 in the presence of a Special Officer, Central Prison, Coimbatore City. The formal arrest of the detenu was given to the detenu through the Jail authority, and the arrest intimation was given to Tmt. Kamala, mother of the detenu on the same day. The Sponsoring authority has brought the accused, Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar, from Central Prison, Coimbatore, to Chennai through escort and was produced before the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai on 10.05.2024 and remanded to Judicial custody till 24.05.2024. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the above cases, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidences, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
    5. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(8) of the affidavit is not correct. The Detaining authority or the Sponsoring authority do not have any personal vendetta against the detenu to detain him as Goonda. The 1st and 2nd adverse cases were registered on receipt of complaints from Tmt. Sandhya Ravishanakar and Tmt.Veeralakshi respectively. The ground case was registered on receipt of the complaint from Thiru Balamurugan, Superintending Engineer-4 (FAC), Construction Wing, CMDA., Chennai. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the above cases, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidence, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
    6. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(9) of the affidavit is not correct. Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar was arrested by the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime P.S., Coimbatore City in Crime No. 123/2024 u/s. 509 IPC and Section 4 of the T.N.P.H.W. (Amendment) Act, 2002 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act on 04.05.2024 and produced him before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No. IV, Coimbatore on 04.05.2024 and remanded to Judicial custody till 19.05.2024 and lodged at Central Prison, Coimbatore.
    7. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(10) of the affidavit is not correct. Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar was arrested by the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime P.S., Coimbatore City in Crime No. 123/2024 u/s.509 IPC and Section 4 of the T.N.P.H.W. (Amendment) Act, 2002 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act on 04.05.2024 and remanded to Judicial custody. There is no reason for the Prison authorities to cause grievous injuries to the detenu. When the detenu was produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai by the Sponsoring authority in the ground case, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate enquired the detenu about the bandage on the right hand. The detenu mentioned that the prison authorities caused the injury by assaulting him with a plastic pipe. In its order, the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate by his order observed that the injury is not mentioned in the Arrest Memo, but that is not affect to remand the accused for proper investigation and therefore remanded him to Judicial custody till 24.05.2024.
    8. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(11) of the affidavit is not correct. The Petitioner herein has repeated the same averment in Paragraph (10) above with different reasons. Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar was arrested by the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime P.S., Coimbatore City in Crime No. 123/2024 u/s. 509 IPC and Section 4 of the T.N.P.H.W. (Amendment) Act, 2002 and Section 67 of Information Technology Act on 04.05.2024. Before producing the accused before the jurisdictional Court for remand, the detenu was subjected to formal medical checkup to ascertain about the injuries and ailments as usual. After obtaining oral report from the Medical Officer, the detenu was produced before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Coimbatore and then he was remanded to Judicial custody. But the Petitioner has levelled allegations of brutal assault by the Prison authorities while in Judicial custody. When the detenu was produced before the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, in the ground case, the detenu raised the same allegations against Prison authorities. The Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai has recorded the same in the remand order and held that injury is not mentioned in the Arrest Memorandum. But that does not affect the remand of the accused for proper investigation. The detenu was remanded to Judicial custody till 24.05.2024
    9. I respectfully submit that the averments made in Paragraph-(12) of the affidavit are not correct. The Petitioner herein has submitted her grievances before this Hon’ble Court with a prayer to grant temporary relief from the Detention. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidence, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
    10. I respectfully submit that the averments made in Paragraph-(13) of the affidavit that the entire exercise by the respondent Police is targeted, arbitrary and ruthless vindictive, is not correct. The respondent Police do not have any personal vendetta against the detenu. Since the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and public. In order to prevent the detenu from indulging in such criminal activities further, on 12.05.2024 he has been detained as Goonda under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.
    11. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(14) of the affidavit is not correct. The Petitioner herein has levelled allegations against the prison authorities. It is not connected to the respondent Police in the two adverse cases and in the ground case.
    12. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(15) of the affidavit is not correct. The government have conferred powers on the detaining authority to pass the order of detention under preventive detention in Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The government have extended the delegation of Power periodically every three months. Lastly, the Government have extended the power in G.O (D) No. 82, Home, P&E (XVI) Department, dated:15.04.2024. In the exercise of the power conferred on him, the Detaining authority has considered the two adverse cases and the ground case, and in order to prevent the detenu from indulging in such criminal cases, he was detained as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
    13. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(16) of the affidavit is not correct. In the adverse case in Crime No. 154/2024 and Crime No.155/2024, the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai considered various aspects and rejected the request of the Inspectors of Police concerned for remand of the accused under judicial custody on 10.05.2024. However, in the ground case in CCD-1 P.S. Crime No. 158/2024, after hearing the arguments of both sides, the Learned Addl. C.M.M., Egmore, Chennai has remanded the accused Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar to Judicial custody till 24.05.2024. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidence, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
    14. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(17) of the affidavit is not correct. The Petitioner herein has levelled allegations against the Police that women Police are escorting the detenu, and whenever Police take the detenu to court, it is alleged that the Petitioner’s son detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar was assaulted by the Police. It is submitted that the Police Officer and their men would not have any intention to commit violence or to use any force with the Media persons. The allegation of the Petitioner herein is incorrect and false without any material evidence.
    15. I respectfully submit that the averment made in Paragraph-(18) of the affidavit is not correct. The Detaining Authority/Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, Chennai has relied upon the two adverse cases registered in (i) Chennai City, Cyber Crime Division-I Crime No. 154/2024 u/s.294(b), 354D, 506(i), 509 of IPC and Section 4 of the T.N.P.H.W. (Amendment) Act, 2002 on 07.05.2024 at 18.00 hours on the complaint of Tmt. Sandhya Ravishankar for the allegation of publishing an article on 27.08.2018 making obscene and willfully false allegations against her amounting to character assassination and harassed her and (ii) Chennai City, Central Crime Dvn.1 Crime No. 155/2024 u/s. 294(b) and 506(i) IPC on 06.05.2024 on the complaint of Tmt.Veeralakshmi for the allegation against the detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar of levelling demeaning, insulting and threatening Police personnel in an interview given by Thiru Savukku Shankar to Thiru Felix, a media person, posted on Youtube on 30.04.2024 as well as the ground case registered on 08.05.2024 in Chennai City Police, Cyber Crime P.S., Central Crime Branch in Crime No.158/2024 u/s. 465, 466, 471, 474 and 420 IPC on the complaint Thiru Balamurugan, Superintending Engineer-I (FAC), Constructing Wing, C.M.D.A., E-Road, Tower-III Koyambedu, Chennai-107 for the detention of the Detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidence and after making his own independent assessment of the case of the detenu and after coming to a subjective satisfaction and a well-considered decision to detain the detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar as Goonda under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. In order to prevent the detenu from indulging in such criminal activities, he was detained as Goonda on 12.05.2024 under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.
    16. I respectfully submit that the averments made in Paragraph-(19) of the affidavit are not correct. The detenu has already been involved in two adverse cases and he has actively indulged in the ground case. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidence, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
      Reply for the grounds:
      a) With regard to the ground (a) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner that the order of detention is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional is not correct. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, in the capacity of Detaining Authority, has considered the two adverse cases and the ground case for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. The activities of the detenu in the above cases are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and public peace. The Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidence, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024 in accordance with law.
      b) With regard to the ground (b) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. The detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar has acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and peace in the two adverse cases and in the ground case and as such, he is a Goonda as contemplated u/s. 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.
      c) With regard to the ground (c) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidences, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
      d) With regard to the ground (d) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. The detention order was passed by the Detaining authority on 12.05.2024. The government have approved the detention of the detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar in G.O.(Rt) No.3093, Home, P&E (XIII) Department, dated:22.05.2024. The government have served the said G.O. to the detenu directly through the Prison authority under proper acknowledgement.
      e) With regard to the ground (e) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. In the adverse cases in Crime No. 154/2024 and Crime No. 155/2024, the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai considered various aspects and rejected the request of the Inspectors of Police concerned for remand of the accused under judicial custody on 10.05.2024. But in the ground case in CCD-1 P.S. Crime No.158/2024, after hearing the arguments of both sides, the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, has remanded the accused Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar to Judicial custody till 24.05.2024. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidences, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
      f) With regard to the ground (f) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner that there is no imminent possibility of the detenu being released on bail is not correct. The detenu is in remand in C.C.B. Cyber Crime Division-I Crime No.158/2024 and he has moved bail application in the above case before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate for CCB and CB.CID. Cases in Sl.No.608/2024 and the bail petition were pending on the date of passing the detention order. Since in the similar case in C.C.B. Crime No. 66/2023 u/s.420 IPC @ 406, 420, 465, 468, r/w. 120(B) of IPC, bail was granted to the accused concerned in a similar case, the Detaining Authority has inferred that it is very likely of the detenu being released on bail in the ground case at the time of disposal of pending bail application. It is submitted that the bail order in the similar case has been considered and discussed in the grounds of detention only with a view to justify the possibility of the detenu being released on bail in the ground case at the time of disposal of pending bail application. Hence, the Detaining authority has raised his apprehension on the grounds of detention.
      g) With regard to the ground (g) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is incorrect and denied as false. In the adverse case in Crime No.154/2024 and Crime No.155/2024, the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai considered various aspects and rejected the request of the Inspectors of Police concerned for remand of the accused under judicial custody on 10.05.2024. However, in the ground case in CCD-1 P.S. Crime No.158/2024, he was formally arrested at Central Prison, Coimbatore. He was produced before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Egmore, Chennai through P.T. warrant for remand and the Learned Addl. C.M.M., Egmore, Chennai has remanded the accused Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar to Judicial custody till 24.05.2024. The arrest intimation of the detenu was informed to him through Prison authority. The arrest intimation of the detenu was also given to Tmt. A. Kamala by the Sponsoring authority in his letter dated 10.05.2024 through Speed post – vide Pages 69 to 75 of the Booklet Volume-I.
      h) With regard to the ground (h) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct, and it is false. The order of detention of the detenu was passed by the Detaining authority on 12.05.2024 around 08.15 hours. The sponsoring authority travelled through Indigo Flight 6E 479, which departed at 10.05 hrs from Chennai International Airport (MAA) and reached Coimbatore International Airport (CJB) at 11.45 hrs. Then, the sponsoring authority served the detention order along with grounds of detention and booklet at 12.10 hrs on the same day through Coimbatore prison authorities under proper acknowledgement.
      i) With regard to ground (i) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. All eligible and relied documents, including similar case documents, have been served to the detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar in the Form of Booklets (two volumes) along with the grounds of detention (Both English and Tamil languages) on 12.05.2024 through the Prison authority under proper acknowledgement.
      j) With regard to the ground (j) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. The government have conferred powers on the Detaining Authority/Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, Chennai-07, to pass an order of detention of a person/accused under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The Government have extended the delegation of powers of the Detaining authority once in every 3 months periodically. The government had last extended the powers in G.O. (D) No.82, Home, P&E (XVI) Department, dated:15.04.2024. The said G.O. is very much available for verification and the detenu and his relatives can access the same.
      k) With regard to the ground (k) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. For the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention, the detaining authority has considered the two adverse cases registered in CCB., Cyber Crime Division-I, Crime No. 154/2024 and Crime No.155/2024 and the ground case in Crime No. 158/2024 as enough. Hence, all eligible and relied documents in respect of the above cases, including the documents of similar cases, have been supplied to the detenu in the Booklets. It is submitted that the case in Cyber Crime P.S. Coimbatore City Crime No.123/2024 has not been taken into consideration for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The Detaining authority has not discussed crime No. 123/2024 on the grounds of detention.
      l) With regard to the ground (l) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. The representation dated:14.05.2024 and 21.05.2024 sent by the Petitioner herein has been received by this office on 15.05.2024 and 22.05.2024 and the same has been considered and rejected by this office on 16.05.2024 and 24.05.2024.
      m) With regard to the ground (m) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. The detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar was arrested (formal arrest) in the ground case on 10.05.2024 at 06.05 hours after obtaining Permission from the Learned Judicial Magistrate No. IV, Coimbatore City and he was brought to Chennai and produced before the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai-08 on 10.05.2024 and remanded him to Judicial custody till 24.05.2024. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the above cases, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidences, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024 within one month time limit stipulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court and this Hon’ble High Court of Madras.
      n) With regard to the ground (n) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. The Petitioner herein has cited a judgment in MANU/SC/0098/1985L 1986 CriL J312. It is advised to submit that the above-mentioned case was registered under the National Security Act, and his great respect discussion of that case may not be applicable to the case of the petitioner. The Detenu has been detained as Goonda under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. It is submitted that the detenu is in remand in the ground case in CCB CCD-I Crime No. 158/2024. He has moved a bail application in the ground case before the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate for CCB and CB.CID. Cases, Egmore, Chennai in Sl.No.608/2024 and the same was pending on the date of passing the order of detention. Since in a similar case registered in CCB-I Crime No.66/2023, bail was granted to the accused concerned in the similar case by the Judicial Magistrate Court, Alandur, the detaining authority has inferred that it is very likely of the detenu coming out on bail in the ground case at the time of disposal of pending bail application. The Detaining authority, therefore, raised his apprehension that if the detenu is released on bail, he will indulge in such criminal activities further without respecting the law of the land. Hence, he was detained as Goonda on 12.05.2024 under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.
      o) With regard to the ground (o) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidences, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
      p) With regard to the ground (p) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. The criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and peace. By committing the grave crime, the detenu has created an alarm and a feeling of insecurity in the minds of the public, and thereby, the Detenu Thiru Shankar @ Savukku Shankar has acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.
      q) With regard to the ground (q) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. The Detaining authority or the Sponsoring authority does not have any personal vendetta against the detenu. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidences, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
      r) With regard to the ground (r) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the Petitioner is not correct. In the first adverse case, the detenu has published an article making obscene and false allegations against the complainant Tmt. Sandhya Ravishankar amounting to character assassination and also posted obscene and vulgar posts about the complainant on his Facebook and other media platforms. In the 2nd adverse case, the detenu has given the interview where he has demeaned, insulted and threatened the female Police personnel. In the ground case, the detenu has deliberately and wantonly held some forged sensitive documents belonging to CMDA and used them purposefully to tarnish the reputation of the State and higher administrative officials and machinery of the CMDA. Considering the criminal activities of the detenu in the two adverse cases and in the ground case, the Sponsoring authority has initiated a proposal for the detention of the detenu as Goonda under preventive detention. After careful perusal of the records and material evidences, the Detaining authority has passed the order of detention of the detenu as Goonda on 12.05.2024.
      s) With regard to the Paragraph ground (s) of the affidavit, it is submitted that the Petitioner herein is at liberty to raise additional grounds at the time of hearing of the H.C.P.No.1163 of 2024, if this Hon’ble High Court permits the same.
    17. I submit that when this matter came up for admission during the vacation court on 23.05.2024, at the time of the hearing, the Hon’ble High Court had called for the original records at 2.15 PM. I further submit that the records were submitted for the perusal of this Hon’ble High Court and at 02.15 PM, without assigning any specific reasons, this Hon’ble Court stated that the matter would be taken up the next day for the final hearing on 24.05.2024. I further submit that the Learned Advocate General made a specific request to adjourn the case so that a counter affidavit can be filed on behalf of the respondent to defend the detention order.
    18. I submit that, when the matter was taken up for hearing on 24.05.2024, this Hon’ble Court had informed that there was a conflicting view between the two Hon’ble Judges. But one of the Hon’ble Judges wanted to hear the matter without the counter affidavit and decide the case on merits, whereas the other Hon’ble Judge had adjourned the matter for filing the counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents, and then take the matter for final hearing.
    19. I submit that since there was a split between the two Hon’ble Judges, the matter was placed before the Hon’ble acting Chief Justice and he had passed an order to place it before the Third Judge to decide the issue of quashing the detention order without giving the opportunity of filing counter affidavit.
    20. I submit that one of the Hon’ble Judges of the Division Bench, who had decided the matter on merits had primarily quashed the detention order on two grounds.
      (1) There was no public order violation on the offence committed by the detenue and normal criminal law would be sufficient to deal with the detenue. (2) The detenue was arrested in Palanichettipatti Police Station, Theni, in Cr.No.195 of 2024 in NDPS Case.
    21. I submit that to answer point No.1 sufficient materials have been placed on the grounds of detention and the booklets served in Page No. 281 to 304 contain material on how Detenu’s speech regarding the Kilambakkam Bus Stand had instigated common people to protest. This establishes there was a public order violation and how Detenu had acted prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. I further submit that Para a, p, r of the counter has dealt with how the public order was violated with regard to the ground case and second Adverse Case.
    22. I submit that to answer point No.2, the Palanichettipatti Police Station, Theni Cr.No.195 of 2024, which has been registered against the detenue, although it is an NDPS case, it was not a commercial quantity and there was no bar under section 37 of NDPS Act to consider his Bail Application. I submit that the grounds of detention are not referring, but the NDPS case does not affect the detention order in any way.
    23. I most respectfully submit that the various reasons attributed by the Petitioner in the affidavit in support of the Petition are not valid grounds to set aside the detention order passed in Memo No. 495/BCDFGISSSV/2024, dated:12.05.2024. The elaborate grounds of detention dated 12.05.2024 clinchingly substantiates that the detention order was made after proper appreciation of facts and after coming to the subjective satisfaction. Further, it is respectfully submitted that if the detention order is set aside and the detenu is released from preventive detention, he will continue to indulge in activities detrimental to public order and peace.
      For the reasons and circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to dismiss the Petition as devoid of merit and render justice.

Commissioner of Police,
Greater Chennai Police,

Solemnly affirmed at Chennai on this
the day of June, 2024 and signed
his name in my presence. BEFORE ME.

FacebookTwitterEmailBloggerGmailLinkedInWhatsAppPinterestTumblrShare
Exit mobile version