MOHAMMED AMJAD Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Mohammed Amjad, the petitioner, has filed this Habeas Corpus petition on behalf of his son, Mohd. Arbaaz @ Arbaz, aged 21 years, the detenu, challenging the detention order vide SB (I)No.155/PD-3/HYD/2020, dated 16.12.2020, passed by the respondent No.2-Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, wherein, the detenu was detained under Section 3(2) of the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Land-Grabbers, Spurious Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertilizer Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders & White Collar or Financial Offenders Act, 1986 (for short, "P.D. Act") and the consequential confirmation order vide G.O.Rt.No.437, General Administration (Spl. (Law & Order)) Department, dated 24.02.2021, passed by respondent No.1.

(2.) Heard the submissions of Sri C.Sharan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri T.Srikanth Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Home representing the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents and perused the record.

(3.) The background of the case, in brief, is that by relying three criminal cases registered against the detenu in Crime Nos.202/2019 and 278/2020 of Falaknuma Police Station and Crime No.174/2020 of Kalapathar Police Station, the respondent No.2-Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, passed the impugned detention order, dated 16.12.2020. According to the respondent No.2, the detenu is a 'Goonda'. He, acting as a leader of a criminal gang, committed offences including brutal murder, attempt to murder with rioting and criminal intimidation using lethal weapons, along with your associates, in an organized manner in the limits of Hyderabad Police Commissionerate, and thus created panic, terror and fear in the minds of general public, thereby disturbing the public order and peace and tranquility in the area. The unlawful activities of the detenu have been causing a feeling of insecurity in the minds of public on a regular basis, which is prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. With a view to prevent the detenu from acting in the manner which is prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, the impugned detention order, dated 16.12.2020, was passed, which was confirmed by the Government, by order, dated 24.02.2021. Hence, this Writ Petition before this Court.