Judgment :- P.K. Misra, J. Heard Mr. D. Veerasekaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. M. Babu Muthu Meeran, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. 2. The order of detention, on the allegation that the detenu is a "Boot-Legger", is in question. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the very ground for detention is that there were several adverse cases against the detenu wherein it was alleged that he had committed various offences. In one such adverse case, the allegation is that he had committed an offence under Section 4(1-A) of T.N.P.Act. It is also not in dispute that the detenu has been remanded in connection with all the adverse cases as well as the ground case. In this background, the detaining authority has only referred to the ground case and has come to the conclusion that there is possibility of the detenu coming out on bail. But there is no such satisfaction in respect of all other adverse cases and more particular, the adverse case in Cr. No. 139 of 2006 wherein it is alleged that he has committed an offence under Section 4(1-A) of T.N.P.Act. 3. In such view of the matter, since there is no satisfaction recorded regarding the detenu being released on bail in the adverse case in Cr.No. 139 of 2006, which is equally serious as compared to the ground case, we are of the opinion that the detention order should be quashed. Hence, the order of detention dated 112. 2006 passed by the first respondent stands quashed. This habeas corpus petition is allowed. The detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless his detention is otherwise required in connection with any other case. `