K PRABHAKARAN Vs. STATEOF KEARALA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the detention of his son Ranjith under the provisions of the Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', for short.

(2.) Ext.P2 is the report made by the Superintendent of Police, Kannur on 8.9.2011, giving the details of five criminal cases in which Ranjith is an accused. On that basis, he sought a declaration that Ranjith is a 'Known Rowdy' and his detention under section 3(3) of the Act. On the basis of Ext.P2 report, the second respondent, the detaining authority under the Act, declared Ranjith as a 'Known Rowdy' under section 2(p) of the Act and ordered his detention under section 3(1) thereof. Though Ext.P1 order was issued as early as on 7.10.2011, the detenu was arrested only on 28.3.2013 and is in detention since then. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed with a prayer to set aside Ext.P1 order and to set the detenu at liberty.

(3.) The grounds on which the order is impugned are that (1) there is long and unexplained delay not only in passing Ext.P1 order but also in its execution by way of arrest of the detenu, (2) that Exts.P1 and P2 were served on the detenu in English and as the detenu is not familiar with that language, his constitutional right to represent against the detention has been adversely affected and (3) that detaining authority was guilty of delay in reporting the matter forthwith to the Government as required in section 3(3) of the Act. On these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the detention is illegal and therefore, the detenu is entitled to be set at liberty.