PRASEETHA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DOES revocation of a detention order under Section 10 (4) fall within the sweep of Section 13 (2) of the Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention)Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'kaapa')? does Section 13 (2) (i) of the KAAPA override the requirements of Section 3 (1) of the KAAPA and is it independent of the stipulations of section 3 (1) of the KAAPA? these are the questions of law coming up for consideration in this writ petition.

(2.) THE petitioner is the wife of the detenu by name Syamkumar, who has been detained under Section 3 (1) read with Section 13 (2) of the KAAPA. A synoptic resume of the events which led to the passing of the impugned order of detention (i. e. Ext. P-1) appears to be vital and necessary.

(3.) THE detenu was involved in four criminal cases, the details of which are given below: <FRM>SAURAS0_896_ILR(KER)4_2009.HTM</FRM> On the basis of these four cases, the detenu was considered to be a known rowdy and an order of detention dated 31-3-2008 was passed against the detenu under section 3 (1) of the KAAPA. A copy of that order is not made available to the court. In execution of the said order of detention, the detenu was arrested on 19-6-2008 and he continues to be under detention. The said order of detention was approved under Section 3 (3) of the KAAPA. The said order of detention was challenged in w. P. (Crl.) No. 274/2008 before this Court. But when a reference was made to the advisory Board constituted under Section 8 of the KAAPA, the Advisory Board reported that in its opinion no sufficient cause is there for the detention of the detenu. Accordingly, by order dated 22-8-2008 (a copy of which is not produced), the order of detention was revoked under Section 10 (4) of the KAAPA and the detenu was released. W. P. (Crl)No. 274/2008 was, in these circumstances, closed as infructuous as per judgment dated 26-8-2008, a copy of which is produced as ext. P-5.