The First Bench Comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M Sathyanarayanan directed the Government Pleader STS Moorthy to file counter affidavit and asked the petitioner S Raju, State Co-coordinator, Human Rights Protection Centre, Tamil Nadu, to file rejoinder within two weeks thereafter.
In his petition, Raju submitted that the government had amended the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act-1982 on August 11 this year bringing cyber and sexual offenders under its ambit omitting the word "habitual".
Normally Goondas Act is slapped on habitual offenders, he contended.
He contended that "there is every possibility of misuse" of this law.
More From This Section
In the case of sexual offenders, preventive detention will not serve any purpose and the only way for speedy justice was immediate investigation, he submitted.
Claiming that the preventive detention of a cyber offender will deny the individual freedom of speech and expression the petitioner said "it is a prior restraint i.E government action that prohibits speech or other expression even before it takes place."
The social media which depends only on the usage of IT to bring out information about "corrupt" politicians and information on government authorities, will be under restraint in the cyber crime using due to this "draconian act", he alleged and prayed to quash the amended act and requested to declare it as null and void.