SUSEELA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is the mother of the detenu namely Sijo, aged 27 years, Karuvichamkuzhi Veedu, Padvaradu Desom, Priyadarsini Road, Kuttanalloor P.O., Thrissur, who was sent to Central Prison, Viyur, from where he has been transferred to the Central Prison, Kannur, where he is detained, pursuant to Ext.P1 order of detention passed by the second respondent.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the records furnished along with the detention order were not fully legible and the petitioner's son is illegally detained without any reasonable cause and without being permitted to resort to his remedies under Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 ('KAAPA' for short). Even though the petitioner has submitted Exts.P2 and P3 representations before respondents 1 and 4 challenging the detention and praying for the release of her son, no orders have been passed so far. Hence this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P1 order is illegal, unjust and arbitrary and the same is not issued in accordance with the provisions of KAAPA. It is also contended that copies of the relevant documents were not supplied to the detenue and he was earlier booked two times under KAAPA and detained for a period of six months and one year respectively. There is a delay of three days in executing Ext.P1 order and therefore, the very object and purpose of issuance of Ext.P1 was defeated. The last crime registered against the detenue was on 08.04.2017 under Sec. 308 Penal Code and the said case was registered with an intention to book the detenue under the KAAPA. The recitals in the record would show that no ingredients to attract the offence were made out. The first case reported after the execution of the last detention order vide C1 65854/2015 dated 30.11.2015 was on 08.04.2017 under Sec. 308 r/w Sec. 34 Penal Code in Crime No. 476 of 2017 of Pudukkad Police Station. The petitioner was arrested in connection with the above crime on 01.05.2017 and he was granted bail on 07.07.2017. While he was in custody, he was also implicated as third accused in Crime No. 220 of 2017 of Varantharappally Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 308 r/w Sec. 34 IPC. Even though he was granted bail on 07.07.2017, because of the implication in the aforesaid crime, he was released only on 12.07.2017. It is contended that Crime No. 220 of 2017 of Varantharappilly Police Station was registered on the allegation of dispute between neighbours and therefore, the implication of the petitioner under proviso (ii) of Sec. 2(p) of KAAPA cannot be sustained.