SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ARAVIND KUMAR, JJ.
Vaddi Lakshmi – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1723 of 2023
Decided On : 20-03-2024
Detention - Sexual Offender - Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 - Sections 2(v), 3(2), 13 - The court interpreted the provisions of the Act, emphasizing that mere involvement in a sexual offence is insufficient for preventive detention unless it is shown to be prejudicial to public order.
Fact of the Case:
The detenu was arrested for extortion and sexual assault, leading to a detention order under the 1986 Act due to concerns about public order and potential reoffending upon release on bail.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the detention order lacked justification as the offences were solitary instances and did not demonstrate a habitual pattern of behaviour that would warrant preventive detention.
Issues: Whether the detention order under the 1986 Act was justified based on the nature of the offences committed by the detenu and their impact on public order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that mere involvement in a sexual offence does not automatically justify preventive detention; there must be a clear connection to public order concerns.
Result: The appeal was allowed, and the detention orders were quashed.
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. The background in which an order of detention under the 1986 Act1 has been passed is that there was a complaint under Section 384 of the IPC for extortion on 27.04.2023. This was followed by a subsequent complaint for commission of an offence under Sections 394, 376D and 411 read with 34 of the IPC on 01.05.2023. The detenu was thereafter arrested on 04.05.2023. It is an admitted fact that the detenu was released on 17.08.2023 as the Court directed that he is entitled for default bail.
3. The present proceedings arise out of an order dated 30.06.2023 passed by the respondent No. 2, the Collector, in exercise of powers under Section 3 of the 1986 Act. The relevant portion of the detention order is as under:
“The proposed detenu made persistent efforts to come out of the prison by moving bail petition in the above case. Police filed counter opposing the grant of bail to him and the same is pending for consideration. Hence, it is apprehended that there is every likelihood of the proposed detenu releasing on bail in due course and I strongly believe that after his release on bail, there is an imminent possibility of the proposed detenu again resorting to similar heinous offences on women folk, which would be detrimental to public order and would create fear in the minds of the women folk, unless he is prevented from doing so by an appropriate order of detention.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred on me under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the “Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Land Grabbers, Spurious Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertiliser Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Statement Offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial Offenders Act, 1986 (Act No. 1 of 1986) r/w G.O. Rt.No.792, General Administration (Spl. Law & Order) Department, dated: 29.05.2023, I do hereby order that BandiNarayana S/o Sambaiah, Aged 43 Yrs, Caste: Khamma, Occ: Mason work, R/o Kopravur Village, PedakakaniMandal, Guntur District of Andhra Pradesh, a ‘Sexual Offender’, be detained from the date of service of this order on him and lodged in Central Prison, Chanchalguda, Hyderabad.”
4. The grounds of detention order are as under:
“You have been making persistent efforts to come out of the prison and moved bail petition in the above case. Considering the heinous offence of sexual assault on a public servant committed by your associate with your active assistance and robbing her valuables i.e. gold ornaments and mobile phone at knife point and in the event of your release on bail, I strongly believe that there is an imminent possibility of you again committing similar offences which would be detrimental to public order and would create fear and a feeling of insecurity in the minds of the women folk, unless you are prevented from doing so by an appropriate order of detention.
As per the clause (v) of section 2 of the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Land Grabbers, Spurious Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertiliser Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document Offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial Offenders Act, 1986" (Act No. 1 of 1986) a “Sexual Offender” means ‘a person who commits or abets the commission of offences in contravention of any of the provisions under the Protection of Child from Sexual offences Act, 2012 or the offences punishable under sections 354, 354-A, 354-B, 354-C, 354-D, 376, 376-A, 376-B, 376-D, 377 or 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860’.
Thus, you have indulged in the acts of “Se
AI
Preventive detention requires a clear connection between the offence and a threat to public order, not merely the nature of the offence itself.
Every breach of the peace does not lead to public disorder. When two drunkards quarrel and fight there is disorder but not public disorder. They can be dealt with under the powers to maintain law and....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of justifying the invocation of preventive detention laws and the distinction between 'law and order' and 'public order' in determini....
Point of Law : Detention order - there is every possibility of detenu committing similar offences in future, which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.- acts of the detenu cannot be ef....
(1) Preventive detention – There is fine distinction between “law and order” and “public order” – Mere registration of three offences by itself would not have any bearing on maintenance of public ord....
The distinction between 'public order' and 'law and order' is crucial in determining the justification for preventive detention under the P.D. Act, and the sufficiency of subjective satisfaction by t....
(1) Preventive detention – Mere apprehension of a breach of law and order is not sufficient to meet standard of adversely affecting “maintenance of public order”.(2) Personal liberty of accused canno....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.