Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan. J.

1. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Government Pleader.

2. This is a writ petition filed invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to quash Exhibit P1 detention order passed under the Kerala Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007, hereinafter referred to as 'KAAPA'. That order is one restraining the petitioner from entering the jurisdictional limits of Ernakulam Rural District Police Chief, for a period of one year from 20.3.2014. Petitioner's representation to the Advisory Board under KAAPA was considered by that authority. Paragraph Nos.5 and 6 of Exhibit P3 order of the Advisory Board clearly show that crimes at serial Nos.1 to 3 and 6 in Exhibit P1 restraint order could not have been made the foundation to enter subjective and objective satisfaction to pass an order in the nature of Exhibit P1. This means that, if at all Exhibit P1 were to stand, it has to be on the basis of the crimes at serial Nos. 4, 5 and 7 as noted in Exhibit P1. The allegations against the petitioner in those cases, as rightly noted by the Advisory Board, fall squarely under Sections 2(i), 2(j) and co