Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.

1. This original petition is filed seeking interference with a detention order under the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007, 'KAAPA', for short. The detention order has not been executed, though it is stated to have been passed on 01.09.201 3.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that challenge to preventive detention order under KAAPA can be done even at pre-execution stage, going by the judgments of the Apex Court. He further argued that out of the four cases enumerated for consideration by the detaining authority, by now, two cases have been quashed by single Judges because the parties had resolved the disputes out of court. The next plea is that on the face of the availability of jurisdiction under Section 1 5 of KAAPA to keep the second petitioner out of the limits of the district to which he belongs, the more drastic step of a preventive detention measure ought not to have been resorted to. He also points out that after the two criminal cases were quashed, petitioners have filed representation before the State Government to recall the preventive detention order.

3. The detention order is n