Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.T.SANKARAN, RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JJ
SEETHADEVI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(Crl.) 202 2015
Detention - Anti-Social Activities - Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act - Sections 3(1), 12, 13 - The court confirmed the validity of the detention order, ruling that the extended detention period aligns with amended provisions; justifications for detention based on past criminal behavior were upheld.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the detention of Bejoy under the KAAPA, executed following multiple post-release offenses. The initial detention was previously upheld. The current case involved a one-year detention order based on continued criminal activity post-release.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the detention order, citing established criminal behavior justifying a year-long detention period based on the amended KAAPA provisions, rejecting the argument for a six-month limitation. It found no violations in procedure related to documentation and approvals.
Issues: Whether the extended detention period was lawful under KAAPA after the detenu's release and if procedural mandates were adequately followed.
Ratio Decidendi: The amended provisions of Section 12 allow a longer detention for individuals who engage in anti-social activities post-release, and procedural compliance regarding the approval of detention orders was satisfied in this case.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
K.T.Sankaran, J.
The petitioner, the mother of Bejoy @ Kunnumpuram Unni who has been detained under Section 3 (1) of the Kerala Anti- Social Activities (Prevention) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the KAAPA'), challenges Exhibit P1 order of detention dated 15.3.2015 as well as the continued detention of the detenu.
2. The detenu was involved in several criminal cases and an order of detention under Section 3 (1) of the KAAPA was passed on 28.3.2009 which was executed on 7.6.2009. Though that order of detention was challenged in W.P.(Crl) No.430 of 2009, this Court dismissed the Writ Petition. The detenu completed the period of detention on 6.3.2009.
3. The present order of detention dated 15.3.2015 was passed alleging that after the detenu was released from jail, he was involved in four criminal cases of serious nature affecting public order. Therefore, Exhibit P1 order of detention dated 15.3.2015 was passed on the ground that the detenu is a known rowdy and his detention is required to prevent him from committing anti-social activities within the State of Kerala. The order of detention was executed on 22.3.2015. The Government approved the order of detention on 31.3.2015. As per Exhibit P16 order dated 19.5.2015, the order of detention was confirmed and the detenu was directed to be detained for a period of one year with effect from the date of detention.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no justification for ordering detention of the detenu for a period of one year since the order of detention was not issued as provided under Section 13 (2) of the KAAPA, but it was issued on the ground that four new cases were registered against the detenu. The other cases taken into account as per the previous detention order are not in existence. The counsel submitted that since the order of detention is a fresh one, the maximum period for which the detenu could be detained would be only six months and not the extended period of one year under Section 12 of the KAAPA as amended by the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act, 2014.
5. To consider the contentions put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it would be apposite to refer to Section 12 before its amendment and as amended.
Section 12 of the KAAPA before its amendment by Act 41 of 2014 was as follows :
“12. The maximum period for which any person may be detained in pursuance of any detention order made under this Act, which has been confirmed under Section 10, shall not exceed six months from the date of detention.”
6. Section 12 was substituted by Amendment Act 41 of 2014 and after the amendment that Section reads as follows :
“12. Maximum period of detention. In pursuance of the first detention order made against any person under this Act and confirmed under Section 10, he may be detained for a period which may extend up to six months from the date of the detention and in pursuance of such subsequent detention order made against such person, he may be detained for a period which may extend up to a maximum of one year.”
7. Section 13 of the KAAPA is also relevant in this context which reads as follows :
“13. Revocation of detention order :- (1) A detention order may, at any time, be revoked or modified by the Government.
(2) The revocation or expiry of a detention order shall not be a bar for the issuance of another detention order under Section 3 against the same person, if he continues to be a person falling within the definition of known rowdy or known goonda as given in Section 2(o) or Section 2(p) and if, -
(i) after release, he is, found to have, again involved in an offence of the nature described in Section 2(o) or Section 2(p) at least in one instance ; or
(ii) the facts, which came to the notice of the Government or the authorised officer after the issuance of the earlier detention order, considered along with previously known facts are sufficient to cause a reasonable apprehension that he is likel
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
