JAYAMMA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether a second order of detention passed under the provisions of the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video or Audio Pirates Act, 1985 ('the Act' for short), by relying on fresh grounds arising out of facts that happened subsequent to quashing of an earlier order of detention and also by relying on the grounds relied on for passing the earlier order of detention, is sustainable in law? This is the question that requires to be determined in this writ petition.

(2.) In this petition, petitioner, who is the mother of one Giddappa @ Lambu Giddappa ('the detenu'), is challenging two preliminary orders of detention dated 15.07.2016 (Annexure-A) and 20.07.2016 (Annexure-E) passed under Section 3 of the Act, and the order of confirmation dated 17.08.2016 (Annexure-F) passed under Sections 12(1) and 13 of the Act whereby the aforesaid order of detention dated 15.07.2016 is confirmed and detention of the detenu is continued in Central Prison, Bellary, for a period of twelve months from 15.07.2016. The aforesaid order of confirmation dated 17.08.2016 was passed after receiving the report of the Advisory Board which stated that there was sufficient cause for detention of the detenu. Hereinafter, the aforesaid three orders of detention are referred to as 'the impugned order of detention'.

(3.) It is relevant to state that the Act provides for Preventive detention of Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video or Audio Pirates, for preventing their dangerous activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.