NIRMALADIVE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has come to this Court with this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue directions to restrain the respondents from executing an order of detention allegedly passed against him under Section 3 of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the KAAPA').

(2.) The petitioner asserts that an order of detention has been passed categorizing him as a 'known rowdy' falling within the ambit of the expression under Section 2(p) of the KAAPA. Three cases are allegedly relied upon to issue such order of detention against him under Section 3 of the KAAPA. The first crime relied on is the one registered, inter alia, under Section 308 IPC on the basis of Ext.P1 FIR i.e., Crime No. 289/06 of the Sakthikulangara Police Station in Kollam District. The second crime on which reliance is placed is the one registered as Crime No. 42/08 of the Sakthikulangara Police Station in Kollam District for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 308 read with Section 149 IPC. The third crime which is relied on by the respondents against the petitioner is Ext.P2 crime i.e., Crime No. 233/09 of the Sakthikulangara Police Station in Kollam District registered under Sections 323 and 324 read with Section 34 IPC. Final reports have been filed in these crimes. It is the submission of the petitioner that an order of detention has been passed and the said order of detention under Section 3 of the KAAPA is likely to be executed against him at any moment. According to the petitioner, such order of detention is not valid, legal and enforcible. He hence prays that the extraordinary constitutional powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution may be invoked to issue appropriate directions to restrain the respondents from executing the said order under Section 3 of the KAAPA.

(3.) The learned Government Pleader, on behalf of the respondents, does not dispute the fact that an order of detention has been passed under Section 3 of the KAAPA reckoning the petitioner as a 'known rowdy' under Section 2(p) of the KAAPA. The learned Government Pleader does not also dispute the fact that the said order of detention takes into account the three crimes referred to by the petitioner in this writ petition.