S JAYAMMA Vs. COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUDDAPAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter arises out of A.P. Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 (Act 1 of 1986).

(2.) The Division Bench, on a doubt expressed by the learned Advocate-General regarding the correctness of the principle laid down in M. Ashok Goud v. Collector, 2002 (5) ALT 72, referred the matter for Full Bench. In fact, the issue involved is:

(3.) The learned Counsel for detenu however submits that while passing the orders of detention, the detaining authority has to form subjective satisfaction on the basis of the grounds mentioned in the detention order and he is not expected to take into consideration stale and non- proximate grounds for reaching such satisfaction while issuing the orders of detention. While, it is the case of the learned Advocate-General that it is always open for the detaining authority to refer to the past events for assessing the propensity of the detenu, if the chain of continuity persists. Various decisions have been brought before this Court to sustain respective contentions, which will be referred to hereinafter.