Point of Law : Detenue is already in custody in some other case, at time when the preventive detention order was passed, and should also satisfy the other parameter

JUDGMENT :

Alexander Thomas, J.

The prayers in the afore-captioned Writ Petition (Criminal), seeking for writs of habeas corpus and certiorari, in relation to the challenge against the impugned order imposed on the detenu concerned, under Sec.3(1) of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short), are as follows:-

“i) call for the records leading to Exts.P1 quash the same by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction;

ii) issue a writ of habeas corpos commanding the respondents to produce the body of the detenue, Bibin Babu, aged 24 years, s/o Babu Jacob, Cheriyapallikunnel House, Athirampuzha P.O. Kottayam, Pin-686 562, the brother of the petitioner who is illegally detained in Central Prison, Kannur before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty forthwith. ;

iii) grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including the costs of this Writ Petition(Criminal)”

2. Heard Sri.M.H.Hanis, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.K.A. Anas, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondents.

3. The petitioner herein is the brother of the detenu involved in this case. The 3rd respondent District Police Chief (Sponsoring Authority), has given report dated 26.05.2022, addressed to the 2nd respondent District Collector -cum-District Magistrate, Kottayam,(detaining authority) that, in view of the factual details contained there in, it is a fit case for the 2nd respondent to invoke the powers under Section 3(1) of the Act, so as to order the preventive detention of the detenu under that provision, in order to prevent him from indulging in further prejudicial or anti-social activities, as conceived in Sec.2(a) of the Act. Thereafter, based on the said report, the 2nd respondent, District Collector-cum-District Magistrate, has issued the impugned Ext.P1 detention order dated 14.06.2022 and, in view of the factual aspects stated therein, it was ordered that the detenu will stand ordered to be detained under Sec.3(1) of the abovesaid Act, as otherwise, he is likely to indulge in serious prejudicial anti-social activities etc. Ext.P1 detention order dated 14.06.2022 was executed by the arrest of the detenu on 14.06.2022 itself. According to the respondents, the 2nd respondent had forthwith communicated a copy of Ext. P1 detention order, along with relevant records, to the competent authority of the 1st respondent State Government in the Home Department. Later, the 2nd respondent had sent the necessary proposal for approval of Ext.P1 detention order to the State Government on 14.06.2022. The Government, thereafter, issued order dated 21.06.2022, approving Ext.P1 detention order, and thereafter, referred the matter for opinion of the advisory board on 01.07.2022 and the advisory board had rendered its opinion on 12.08.2022, with a recommendation that there is sufficient cause for the preventive detention of the detenu, as per Ext.P1. Further that, the 1st respondent State Government in the Home Department, has issued GO(Rt).2323/2022/Home dated 21.08.2022, confirming Ext.P1 detention order. Altogether, seven crimes have been reckoned in the issuance of Ext.P1 detention order, wherein the last prejudicial activity (date of commission of the last crime) was on 19.04.2022. The details of the seven crimes are given in Ext.P1 detention order as well as in para 6 of pages 5 to 9 of the counter affidavit dated 15.11.2022, filed by the 1st respondent State Government. There is no dispute regarding the factual details of the said seven cases, and hence, there is no necessity for us to reproduce the same. Going by the nature of the allegations raised in such crimes, there is also no serious dispute that the detenu would satisfy the defenitional parameters of 'Known-rowdy' under Sec