SHRUTHI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHAT is the nature and quality of consideration which a representation made by a detenu under Art. 22 (5) of the Constitution of India and S. 7 (2) of the Kerala Anti-Social activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the' KAAPA') must receive at the hands of the Government? Does the failure to give a real and proper consideration by the Government vitiate continued detention? These questions arise mainly for consideration in this Writ Petition. (2) In this application for issue of a writ of habeas corpus filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, the wife of the detenu, assails Ext. P1 order of detention passed under S. 3 (l) of the KAAPA against the detenu.

(2.) THE petitioner is the wife of K. Ravi, the detenu. The detenu was involved in as many as 5 cases; the details of which are given below: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_893_KERLT4_2009Html1.htm</FRM>

(3.) THE Superintendent of Police, Kasargod, by his report under S. 3 (1) of the KAAPA dated 23. 01. 09 [copy produced as Ext. R2 (g)], submitted a proposal to the 2nd respondent (District Magistrate) to invoke the powers under S. 3 (i) of the KAAPA to detain the detenu. Accepting the report of the sponsoring authority, Ext. P1 order of detention was passed on 16. 02. 2009. The order could not be executed for some time. Finally in execution of ext. P1 order, the detenu was arrested and detained on 02. 07. 2009. Copies of the order and grounds were furnished to the detenu in due time and the detenu submitted Ext. R2 (m)representation dated 08. 07. 09 to the Government. That representation submitted through the prison authorities was received by the prison authorities on 08. 07. 09 and it was forwarded to the Government. The Government allegedly received the same on 13. 07. 09. In the meantime, Ext. P5 order of approval dated 10. 07. 09 was passed by the Government under S. 3 (3) of the KAAPA. After receipt of Ext. R2 (m) representation, the Government, by Ext. P8 order dated 17. 07. 2009, rejected the said representation. In accordance with the provisions of the KAAPA, the Advisory Board considered the matter and opined to the Government that there was sufficient reason to justify detention. Accordingly ext. R1 (a) order dated 26. 08. 09 was passed by the Government confirming the order of detention under S. 10 (4) of the KAAPA. Accordingly the detenu will have to remain in custody for a period of 6 months from 02. 07. 2009. It is at this juncture that we are called upon to consider the request of the petitioner, the wife of the detenu to set aside the order of detention and to set the detenu at liberty.