1 where there was clear admission about the unlawful activities.
In any event the effect of Section 5A of the Act has number been kept in view by the High Court.
Therefore, the factual position involved in Criminal Appeal No.
701 of 1999.
The State of Tamil Nadu and District Magistrate Collector, Vellore District hereinafter referred to as the detaining authority call in question legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court quashing the order of detention dated 29.3.1988 passed by the Detaining Authority.
With Crl.
702 of 1999 has its foundation on the judgment impugned in Criminal Appeal No.
A Habeas Corpus Petition was filed by the wife of Kethiyan Perumal hereinafter described as the detenu who was detained under Section 3 1 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot leggers, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 in short the Act .
The impugned judgment in Criminal Appeal No.
701 of 1999 is described.
A. No.702 of 1999 ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. These two appeals involve identical issues.
