RUCKSANA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt.Rucksana, the wife of the detenu, Mundagalla Santosh, has filed the present Writ Petition, challenging the Detention Order passed by the 2nd respondent, who by exercising the powers conferred 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, Fertiliser Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document Offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial Offenders Act, 1986 (in short, 'the Act'), vide Proceedings in SB (I) No.326/PD-6/HYD/2018, dated 04.12.2018, and confirmed by the 1st respondent vide G.O.Rt.No.382, General Administration (Spl. (Law & Order) Department, dated 07.02.2019, alleging that the detenu has been habitually committing property offences in an organized manner and thereby creating large scale fear and panic among the general public and acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The ground on which the impugned detention order is passed by the 2nd respondent is that the detenu was involved in two similar offences viz., (1) crime No.146/2018 of Nallakunta PS, and (2) crime No.232/2018 of Osmania University PS.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that the detenu was falsely implicated in the above referred cases. Even though, the detenu was granted bail by the concerned Court, he continued to be in judicial custody due to passing of the impugned detention order and the same is passed only to see that the detenu does not come out of the jail. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties, and perused the impugned order.