Back
ALEXANDER THOMAS, SOPHY THOMAS
Asker Ali, S/o. Rasak – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Alexander Thomas, J.)
1. The prayers in the instant W.P.(Crl.), seeking for quashment in relation to an externment order passed against the petitioner herein, as to the provisions of Sec.15(1) of the Kerala Anti-Social (Activities) Prevention Act (KAAPA), 2007 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’ for short), are as follows:-
And
ii) Grant such other reliefs that this Honourable Court deem fit and proper to grant in the interest of justice."
2. Heard Smt.Saipooja, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.K.A. Anas, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondents.
3. The order under challenge in this writ petition (criminal) is the impugned Ext.P1 order dated 09.06.2022, issued by the 2nd respondent-Deputy Inspector General of Police, Kannur Range, under Sec.15(1) of the Act, by which it has been ordered that the petitioner, who is an ordinary resident of Wayanad District, shall not enter into the limits of the said district for a period of six months therefrom, in order to prevent him from further prejudicial antisocial activit
Section 107 of Cr.PC reads as security for keeping peace in other cases.
The delay in issuing an externment order does not necessarily invalidate the order if the live link for passing the order is maintained, and the authority has the power to prevent anti-social activit....
Timely action is essential in externment proceedings to maintain a live link between the last prejudicial act and the order, ensuring the authority's satisfaction is justified.
Unreasonable delay in externment proceedings can sever the connection to criminal activities and warrant modification of the order.
Excise officers should be treated at par with police officers for purpose of attracting bar against admissibility of confession as in Section 25 of Evidence Act.
The delay in issuing an externment order without justification severed necessary connections with the alleged prejudicial activities, necessitating the order's annulment.
The court affirmed that the delay in issuing an externment order under the KAA(P) Act was not excessive and that such orders can coexist with ongoing proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C.
A jurisdictional authority must consider bail conditions before issuing an externment order under the relevant statute.
Preventive detention under KAA(P) Act is justified in light of recurrent criminal activity despite existing legal measures.
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
