Latest news with #TamilNaduPreventionofDangerousActivitiesAct
Hindustan Times
24-06-2025
- Hindustan Times
SC lauds Tamil Nadu's use of preventive detention to combat cybercrime
The Supreme Court has commended Tamil Nadu's legislative and administrative resolve in tackling cybercrime through preventive detention, noting that traditional criminal laws are inadequate in addressing the rising menace of online financial fraud. The court highlighted the severity of such offences and their broader economic consequences. (ANI) 'It is a good trend coming from the state to use preventive detention laws against cyber offenders. It is a very welcome approach,' a bench of justices Sandeep Mehta and Joymalya Bagchi said on Monday. The court was hearing a petition of the father of Abhijeet Singh, detained under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982 (commonly referred to as the Goondas Act), for allegedly duping a woman of ₹ 84.5 lakh in a cyber fraud. The Theni district collector issued the detention order on August 23, 2024, based on a Cyber Crime Branch complaint. Singh was allegedly part of an organised cybercrime network. He allegedly defrauded the woman and invested over ₹ 12 lakh in companies under his and his family's names to conceal the proceeds. The court highlighted the severity of such offences and their broader economic consequences. 'Normal criminal laws are not proving successful against these offenders.' The court appreciated special preventive mechanisms, such as detention laws, to contain the growing threat of cyber fraud, which often leaves victims financially and emotionally devastated. In its submissions, the Tamil Nadu government underlined the gravity of the offence and the impact of such frauds on the economy. It told the court that its probe led to the recovery of ₹ 44,000 in cash, over 100 credit and debit cards, five mobile phones, and 27 bank accounts; 17 of which were allegedly used in similar frauds across India. The court noted that the Tamil Nadu government filed a response but adjourned the matter until June 25 since the document was unavailable before the bench. Singh's counsel, advocate Laxmikant Matadan Shukla, argued the alleged cybercrime was a 'solitary act' and that his client had no previous criminal antecedents. He called preventive detention for a first-time offence excessive. Shukla said the Madras high court failed to appreciate this while dismissing the plea against the detention order on March 28. He argued that sufficient time was not given to his client to respond to the notice issued. Shukla added an advisory board, which upheld the detention, overlooked this procedural lapse. The Supreme Court agreed to examine the claims but clarified, in its preliminary observations, that it could not reduce the period of detention in a writ proceeding. 'Period of detention cannot be decided by the court in writ jurisdiction. If the detention order has no basis, the order itself must go, but the period cannot be curtailed. It is the discretion of the state.' The state defended the detention, saying Singh was informed and equipped to respond to the proceedings. It added that Singh, a native Punjabi speaker and an MBA residing in Delhi, was served all necessary documents in English and Hindi, which he comprehended well enough to make detailed representations before the detaining authority, the advisory board, and the government. The high court upheld the detention, observing that no material was presented to show Singh was deprived of the right to make an effective representation. 'No doubt, reasonable time must be given to the detenu to make effective representation, and the said opportunity to be heard cannot be a farce or empty formality. However, in this case, there is no material explicitly or implicitly to infer that the detenu was deprived of his right.'
United News of India
23-06-2025
- United News of India
SC appreciates Tamil Nadu's use of preventive detention laws against cybercrime offenders
New Delhi, Jun 23 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday commended the State of Tamil Nadu for invoking preventive detention laws to tackle cybercrime, describing it as a "welcome trend" in combating growing digital frauds. A Bench comprising Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Joymalya Bagchi made the observation while hearing a petition challenging the preventive detention of one Abhijeet Singh, a cybercrime accused. Singh's detention under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982, had earlier been upheld by the Madras High Court. "This is a good trend coming from the State , that preventive detention laws are being used against cyber offenders. It's a very welcome approach. Normal criminal laws are not proving successful against these offenders," remarked Justice Mehta during the hearing. The petitioner, Singh's father, argued that the detention order was unconstitutional and violated Article 22(5) of the Constitution. He contended that the alleged cyber fraud was a one-off incident and did not disturb public order. He also claimed that the notice for the Advisory Board hearing was served too close to the hearing date, preventing the detenu from making an effective representation. Singh, a Punjab native residing in New Delhi, was arrested on July 25, 2024, following a complaint of a cyber fraud amounting to Rs 84.5 lakh lodged at the Cyber Crime Police Station in Theni district. The complainant, Bhanumathi, alleged that Rs 12.14 lakh was transferred into Singh's account operated under the entity name M/s Creative Craaft. Investigations revealed that Singh had floated four companies and opened multiple bank accounts in the names of his family members to route the fraudulent funds. The District Collector issued the detention order on August 23, 2024, which was subsequently confirmed by the Advisory Board on September 25, and by the State Government for a 12-month period on November 9, 2024. The petitioner's counsel argued that Singh had no prior criminal record and emphasised that preventive detention for the maximum period was unjustified. In response, Justice Mehta observed, 'That is the discretion of the State. The period of detention cannot be decided by the court in writ jurisdiction. "If there is no basis for detention, the order itself has to go, the period cannot be curtailed independently.' The Court took note of the counter affidavit filed by the State and directed the Registry to upload it on record. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on Wednesday, June 25, 2025. Earlier, the Madras High Court had dismissed the habeas corpus petition, holding that the detention order was backed by sufficient material, the procedures were duly followed, and there was no legal infirmity to warrant interference. UNI SNG
The Hindu
12-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Invoke Goondas Act against sand smugglers, sand miners: activists
A group of environmental activists on Thursday urged the State government to arrest all those arrested recently for illegal sand mining from the Cauvery be detained under the Goondas Act. In a memorandum addressed to Karur District Collector M. Thangavel, the activists said that a special team formed by Tiruchi (Range) Deputy Inspector-General of Police Varun Kumar had arrested 10 persons and seized 26 tipper lorries, three cars, one laptop, and four seals with the State government emblem, a trip sheet, a large number of holograms and ₹2.26 lakh cash at Manmangalam for illegal mining and transporting the sand with forged documents, thereby suggesting that the illegal sand miners had run a parallel government. It had brought to light that they had indulged in large-scale sand mining, worth several crores, for so long by making fake government emblems, documents and seals, they said. R.S. Mugilan, coordinator, Tamil Nadu Environmental Protection Movement, who along with other activists presented a petition to the district authorities, said that within a few days after the arrest and seizure of vehicles, the accused again started to indulge in sand mining from the Cauvery, thereby suggesting that no policemen, including the DIG, could not stop their illegal activities. It should be stopped and the offenders should be detained under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act (Goondas Act), he added.
