Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., JJ.
Ramseena W/o Sanooj – Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
W.P. (Crl.) No. 79 of 2021
Decided On : 25-08-2021
Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007- order of detention- order was issued by treating the detenue as a ‘known goonda’ as defined under Section 2(o) of the KAA(P)A. The detention was approved by the Advisory Board – Challenged
Finding of the Court:
various stipulations as contained in KAA(P)A regarding the compliance of time limit to be followed while passing the order of detention and for confirming the same, were complied with. It is evident from the records that the detenue is involved in 9 cases during the period of 2016 to 2020; within a period of seven years preceding to the order of detention, which is a mandatory requirement. All the said cases are pertaining to the offences which come under the definition of ‘goonda’ as defined under Section 2(j) of the Act and the detenue also satisfies the definition of ‘known goonda’ as contemplated under Section 2(o) of KAA(P)A. It is evident from the records that, authorities concerned have applied their mind and arrived at a subjective satisfaction as to the necessity to pass an order of detention. We do not find any materials or grounds to interfere with such a decision taken by them
Result: Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT :
1. This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce Sri. Sanooj, aged 28 years, who is the husband of the petitioner. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of detention passed by the 2nd respondent against the said Sanooj under the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 [for brevity KAA(P)A] vide Ext.P1. The said order was passed based on the reports submitted by the 3rd respondent on 20.10.2020 and pursuant to the said order dated 7.12.2020, the detenue was arrested on 10.12.2020. The order was issued by treating the detenue as a ‘known goonda’ as defined under Section 2(o) of the KAA(P)A. The detention was approved by the Advisory Board on 4.02.2021 and was confirmed by the Government as per Ext.P15 order. The details of the cases in respect of which Ext.P1 order of detention was passed are as follows:
| S. No. | Police Station | Crime No. | Date and Time | Offences | Stage |
| 1 | Chathanoor Excise Range | Crime No. 7/2016 | 25.10.2016, 8.45 P.M. | 20(b)(II)(A) of the NDPS Act | Convicted and fine Rs. 5000/- |
| 2 | Chathanoor Excise Range | 151/2016 | 25.10.2016, 8.35 P.M. | 55A, 551, 67B of the Abkari Act | Pending as SC No. 497/2019 Trial |
| 3 | Chathanoor Police Station | 17/2016 | 9.4.2018, 6 P.M. | 20(b)II(A) of the NDPS Act | Found guilty and fine Rs. 5000/- |
| 4 | Chathanoor Excise Range | 19/2018 | 21.4.2018, 10 A.M. | 20(b)II(A) of the NDPS Act | Found guilty and fine Rs. 5000/- |
| 5 | Chathanoor Police Station | 266/2018 | 26.3.2018, 8 P.M. | 341, 323, 324, 325, 34 IPC | Pending Trial as C.C. No. 466/2018 |
| 6 | Parippilly Police Station | 620/2018 | 26.3.2018, 8 P.M. | 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act | Pending Trial as S.C. No. 1353/2018 |
| 7 | Chathanoor Excise Range | 20/2019 | 19.2.2019, 10 A.M. | 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act | Pending Trial SC No. 370/2020 |
| 8 | Chathanoor Excise Range | 61/2019 | 15.10.2019, 10.10 A.M. | 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act | Pending Trial as CC No. 182/2020 |
| 9 | Chathanoor Police Station | 1525/2020 | 21.8.2020, 5.45 P.M. | 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act | Investigation not completed |
2. Heard Sri. C. Rajendran, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K.A. Anas, the learned Senior Government Pleader.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner raised various contentions such as; some of the cases which formed the basis of his detention are under NDPS Act and the petitioner has already pleaded guilty in respect of the same. According to him, the mandate of declaring a person as a known goonda, as contemplated under Section 2(o) of the KAA(P)A is that the detenue must have been “found guilty” by a competent court or the authority at least once, for an offence within the meaning of the term of ‘goonda’ as defined under clause (j) of Section 2. In the cases under the NDPS Act, the accused pleaded guilty and there is no finding of guilt entered by a competent court on evidence led. The representations submitted by the petitioner were not considered by the Government while confirming Ext.P1 detention order. Even though the detenue requested for an opportunity of personal hearing while considering his case, the Advisory Board did not permit the same. There is a delay of 3 months and 19 days between the last prejudicial activity and the order of detention; hence the live link between the last prejudicial activity and the detention was broken. Crime 1525/2020 registered by Chathannoor Police Station; the last prejudicial activity, was in respect of an act allegedly committed by him on 21.8.2020 and the allegation therein is the possession of 1638 gm. of ganja for sale by the detenue and his associate. No recovery has been effected from the possession of the detenue in the said case and in the absence of such recovery, no
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
