Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, MR. G.GIRISH TH, JJ
FARSANA.K – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's challenge against the preventive detention order based on husband's classification as a known rowdy. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments concerning procedural compliance in the issuance and justification of the detention order. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's analysis of legality surrounding grounds for detention and the adequacy of evidence. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. final considerations on the necessity of delays and classifications under kaa(p)a. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. conclusion reaffirming the validity of the detention order. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. final decision of the court. (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT
G.Girish, J.
Aggrieved by Ext.P1 order of the District Magistrate, Malappuram, in respect of the preventive detention of the husband of the petitioner, the present petition is filed by her under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of habeas corpus.
2. Ext.P1 order is the outcome of the report dated 14.05.2024 of the District Police Chief, Malappuram about four crimes in which the husband of the petitioner is involved, which were sufficient to classify him as a ‘known rowdy’ under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 [for short ‘KAA
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
