THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

Petitioner seeks a direction requiring initiation of action against the eighth respondent, a citizen of India, under the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007, “KAAPA”, for short.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government pleader.

3. The provisions for preventive detention order and restraint order under KAAPA could come only as preventive measures. Judicial precedents in the realm of preventive detention are vociferous of the pristine liberty doctrine enshrined in Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. In the constitutional alchemy, respecting the salutary human right doctrines resonating in the international domain, and standing advised by the pearls of wisdom as to the most precious constitutional right to liberty under the Constitution of India, we are unable to visualise any ground of statutory or public duty, in any executive authority to invoke the provisions of KAAPA at the instance of a private party. There is no statutory or constitutional right for any person; to assert as a citizen of a preventive detention proceedings or restraint proceedings under any preventive detention laws.

4. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we cannot but say that this writ petition is misplaced and misconceived, on issues relating to the Constitution of India and the laws.

In the result, this writ petition is dismissed in limine.

Petition dismissed.