Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Uppalapati Srihari, S/o. Subbarao – Appellant
Versus
State of A.P., Rep. By Its Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Amaravati – Respondent
ORDER :
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.
Heard Sri Prudvi Raju Mudunuri, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General for Respondents.
2. The detenue in the present case is said to have been arrayed as an accused in the following cases:-
1. Cr.No.78/2015, U/s.354-D(2), 506 and 509 IPC of Patamata Police Station, Krishna District (Acquitted).
2. Cr.No.600/2018, U/s. 506 IPC of Nallapadu PS, Guntur District.
3. Cr.No.56/2023, U/s 420 read with 34 IPC of Chilakapuripeta P.S.
4. Cr.No.153/2023, U/s 354-A, 354-D and 506 of Nidadavole PS.
5. Cr.No.177 /2023, U/s 386 IPC of Nidadavole PS.
6. Cr.No.343/2023, U/s 420 IPC of Bommuru Police Station.
7. Cr.No.211/ 2023, U/s 354-D IPC and Sec.66(e), 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 of Nidadavole PS.
8. Cr.No.14/ 2024, U/s.8(c) r/w 20 (b) (ii) (c) of NDPS Act, 1985 of Nidadavole PS.
3. The detenue had been granted bail in four of the above eight cases. At that stage, the 3rd Respondent had issued an order of detention dated 15.03.2024 in Roc.No.M1(Ndd.PS)/486139/2024 detaining the detenue in Central Prison, Rajamahendravaram. The same was approved vide G.O.Rt.No.775, dated 25.04.2024 issued by the 1st Respondent.
4
Preventive detention requires clear evidence of the likelihood of release and necessity for detention; vague assertions are insufficient.
Preventive detention orders must provide all relevant documents to the detenue for effective representation; failure to do so invalidates the detention.
A detention order can be validly issued against a person in custody if there is a rational basis for the likelihood of release and the necessity for preventive detention.
A detention order must demonstrate subjective satisfaction with detailed grounds, especially regarding the detenu's bail status, to be legally valid.
Confirmed detention order - Subjective satisfaction arrived by Detaining Authority that acts and conduct of petitioner were prejudicial to maintenance of public order cannot be faulted at.
The failure to consider the orders of bail granted to the detenu by the competent Court vitiated the detention order, as it deprived the detaining authority of the opportunity to consider relevant ma....
Procedural irregularities and failure to consider the likelihood of the detenu being released on bail rendered the detention order illegal and unsustainable.
AN ORDER OF DETENTION CAN ONLY BE VALIDLY PASSED IF THE DETAINING AUTHORITY HAS REASON TO BELIEVE, ON THE BASIS OF RELIABLE MATERIAL, THAT THERE IS A REAL POSSIBILITY OF THE DETENU BEING RELEASED ON ....
Preventive detention orders must consider the detenu's existing custody and provide cogent reasons for necessity; failure to do so renders the order illegal.
Failure to consider and furnish conditional bail orders in a preventive detention order renders the detention illegal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
