CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has quashed the orders for detaining 17 persons, accused in the murder of BSP leader K Armstrong, under the Goondas Act finding several procedural lapses in processing and passing the detention order.
A division bench of justices MS Ramesh and V Lakshminarayanan on Wednesday passed the orders to quash the detention of the accused under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982. The detenues included Nagendran who is considered the main accused in the brutal murder, his son Aswathaman, and Anjalai.
Referring to one case, the bench termed it “humanly impossible” for the detaining authority, commissioner of Greater Chennai Police, to have perused the grounds of detention running to almost 1,000 pages on the same day, 19.9.2024, the proposal was sent by the sponsoring authority (assistant commissioners concerned) to the commissioner.
“The detaining authority appears to have scrutinised approximately 14,000 pages on one single day and passed 14 detention orders, which is an impossible task for any human being. Not to mention that the detaining authority, in the rank of a commissioner of police, did not undertake any official or other administrative work on the said day,” the noted.
The bench said it was constrained to hold that the detaining authority had not applied his mind while passing the grounds of the detention and detention order.
On the apprehension raised by additional advocate general P Kumaresan, appearing for the police, that the bail courts tend to grant bail to those accused persons whose detention orders were quashed, the bench said the bail courts are reminded that the standard or grounds for consideration of bail application is distinct from that of the grounds of consideration adopted by the High Court regarding the detention orders.
It said the trial courts shall not rely on orders for quashing the preventive detention order.
Procedural lapses
Finding several procedural lapses in processing and passing the detention order, the bench termed it “humanly impossible” for the detaining authority to have perused the grounds of detention running to almost 1,000 pages on the same day – 19.9.2024
