The Madras High Court has quashed the preventive detention order passed by the then Commissioner of Police, A Arun, against real estate developer Santhosh Sharma, stating that breaching contractual obligations by a few individuals does not pose a threat to public order or public safety.
Court's Observations
A vacation bench comprising Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan observed that there was no warrant for invoking the draconian law of preventive detention in such cases. The bench stated, "We are more than satisfied that the ground case as well as the adverse cases do not have the potential to disturb public order. It is ridiculous to claim that they will disturb the even tempo of social life."
Background of the Case
The detention stemmed from a dispute involving a residential apartment project in Kolathur, Chennai. Santhosh Sharma had entered into an agreement to construct 234 apartment units on a property owned by Poornajothi, wife of L K Sudheesh, at Ramadoss Nagar. Under the agreement, 78 apartments were to be allotted to Sudheesh and Poornajothi. Police registered a case and arrested Santhosh Sharma based on a complaint, and detained him under the Goondas Act after he was released on bail.
Petition and Summons
Santhosh's wife filed a habeas corpus petition before the High Court seeking to quash the detention order. The vacation bench heard the petition and had summoned A Arun, who is now the director of the DVAC. The officer appeared before the bench in person and justified his action.
Legal Principles
The bench observed, "It is not enough that one is categorised as a Goonda for being slapped with a preventive detention order. Such a Goonda must also have acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order." The court set aside the detention order, criticizing the IPS officer for becoming "habituated to issuing such orders, most of which have come to the notice of this court and quashed." The bench referred to cases involving YouTuber Savukku Shankar and Vaaraki, who were detained under the Goondas Act by Arun's orders.
Censure of the Officer
The bench noted that even before them, Arun did not appear to feel that he had passed a wrong order and strongly justified his conduct. The judges stated, "He ought to be aware that a preventive detention order cannot be passed recklessly as it has serious implications on the detenu's liberty. The detention order has been passed for extraneous reasons. We censure Arun IPS for having passed the impugned detention order."
While maintaining that detenu Santhosh Sharma does not appear to be a paragon of virtue, the judges said he is rightly being prosecuted. The question before the court was whether the detenu could have been detained as a "Goonda" under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The court answered in the negative, quashing the detention order.
