High CourtsDivision Bench(2024) 04 KL CK 0078

Rosamma Selestine vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 8 April 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J · M.A.Abdul Hakhim, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 1902 Of 2007

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 242 words

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.

1.

The petitioner is the mother of the detenu. Invoking provisions under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (PIT NDPS), the detenu has been detained for a period of one year.

2.

The following four crimes were relied on, for passing the detention order:

Sl.           Police Station                      Crime No.             Date of Occurrence

No.

1              Thadiyittaparambu            228/2022              25.03.2022

Police Station

2              Thadiyittaparambu            191/2022              14.03.2022

Police Station

3              Kalamassery Police           1666/2021            13.11.2021

Station

4              Viyyur Police Station         548/2011              08.06.2011

3.

As seen from the impugned order, the last prejudicial activity was on 25.03.2022. The sponsoring authority submitted its report on 25.10.2022. The detention order was passed only on 25.07.2023.

4.

We find that there is a delay of more than five months in submitting the report by the sponsoring authority. Thereafter, the sponsoring authority took another nine months for passing the detention order. It is a serious lapse in this matter in taking prompt action. The purpose of the detention order is to prevent commission of the offences and it cannot be used as a penal provision. The delay is also not explained. According to us, the live-link between the last prejudicial activity and the detention order has been snapped. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order. The detenu shall be released forthwith, provided, if he is not otherwise required in any other case under law.

This W.P.Crl. is disposed of as above.