Sunitha Vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala 2 Apr 2024 Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 254 Of 2024 (2024) 04 KL CK 0027
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 254 Of 2024

Hon'ble Bench

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J; M.A.Abdul Hakhim, J

Advocates

Sarath Babu Kottakkal, Vishnuprasad Nair, Archana Vijayan, K.A.Anas

Final Decision

Disposed Of

Judgement Text

Translate:

1. The petitioner is the mother of the detenu. The detenu is 24 years old. He has been detained under the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007. The detenu has been arrayed as accused in 6 criminal cases. They are, Crime Nos.1352 of 2017 of Town West Police Station, Thrissur, 97 of 2019 of Mannuthy Police Station, 1030 of 2019 of Town East Police Station, Thrissur, 757 of 2020 of Mannuthy Police Station, 122 of 2023 of Mannuthy Police Station and 748 of 2023 of Ollur Police Station. The last prejudicial activity was on 16.07.2023 and the Sponsoring Authority submitted that it was reported only on 13.10.2023. The detention order was passed on 07.11.2023.

2. We find considerable delay on the part of the Sponsoring Authority in submitting its report before the Detention Authority concerned. It is to be noted that in respect of the last crime, he obtained bail from the Police Station itself. There is no difficulty in collecting all the details immediately after the last prejudicial activity. However, the Sponsoring Authority has chosen to file the report only after about three months. The delay is not explained.

3. The purpose of detention order is to prevent commission of offence, if it is found that the person against whom detention order is passed has a proclivity or tendency to repeat commission of such offences. It cannot be used as a penal measure to penalize a person. The Sponsoring Authority ought to have taken immediate steps to submit a report before the Detention Authority. We note in this matter that there is a considerable delay between the last prejudicial activity and the date of submission of the report. Accordingly, we find live-link between the last prejudicial activity and detention order has been snapped.

Adverting to the nature of the case, we are of the view that this is a fit case where the impugned order has to be set aside and we direct the prison authorities to release the detenu forthwith, if his detention is not otherwise required under law.

This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More