BABY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned State Attorney in this writ petition seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus or other appropriate writ, direction or order interfering with the preventive detention of the petitioner's son Manikandan @ Mani.

(2.) On the basis of a prejudicial activity stated to have occurred on 31/01/2016, the detenu was arrested and detained after lodgment of the First Information Report. Pending those criminal proceedings, the regular bail Court did not come to the aid of the detenu. He thus continued under detention following arrest from 21/02/2016. While so, on 27/04/2016, an order of detention dated 22/04/2016 was served on him invoking the provisions of Kerala Anti - Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007, 'KAAPA Act', for short, by taking the stand that he is a known rowdy having regard to the different prejudicial activities attributed to him.

(3.) Following execution of the detention order, the detenu was served with what is called the grounds of detention. The detention order was approved by the competent authority, which is the Advisory Board in terms of the provisions of the KAAPA Act. Thereafter, the Government issued a confirmation order, under which, the detention was confirmed to be for six months. That period is due to expire on 27/10/2016.