VEERAMANI versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU
Under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, a representation for revocation of a detention order must be made to the State Government, which has the power to approve or revoke, and not to the detaining authority itself. Once the detention order is approved by the Government, the power reserved by the General Clauses Act is no longer exercisable by the detaining authority. Serving grounds within 5 days meets the statutory requirement, and the detention of a person already in custody is valid if there is imminent possibility of release and engagement in prejudicial activities.
- Parties
- Petitioner: Veeramani; Respondent: State of Tamil Nadu
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 04 February 1994
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition (criminal), Special Leave Petition (criminal) / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Petitions dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Preventive Detention, Representation for Revocation of Detention, Approval and Revocation of Detention Orders, Interpretation of 'as Soon as May Be'
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Veeramani
Petitioner
State of Tamil Nadu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (criminal), Special Leave Petition (criminal) / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the detainee is entitled to make a representation to the detaining authority under Article 22(5) of the Constitution or only to the State Government
- 2 Whether the detention order is valid when the detaining authority is aware the detainee is in custody and might be released on bail
- 3 Whether delay in serving grounds of detention vitiates detention
Ratio Decidendi
Under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, a representation for revocation of a detention order must be made to the State Government, which has the power to approve or revoke, and not to the detaining authority itself. Once the detention order is approved by the Government, the power reserved by the General Clauses Act is no longer exercisable by the detaining authority. Serving grounds within 5 days meets the statutory requirement, and the detention of a person already in custody is valid if there is imminent possibility of release and engagement in prejudicial activities.
Court Disposition
Petitions dismissed
Orders
- Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 364/93 and S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 2685/93 are dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment