Srinivasa vs The State of Karnataka

N.K. Patil, J.—The petitioner is questioning the correctness of the order dated 10.02.2014 passed by the Respondent No. 2 in No. MAG(1).CR.62/31476/2013-14 produced at Annexures A and B, Confirmation Order of Detention dated 17.02.2014 passed by the 1st respondent in G.O. No. HD 61 SST 2014 produced at Annexure ''E''. The extension of Order of Detention dated 28.03.2014 passed by the 1st Respondent in G.O. No. HD 61 SST 2014 at Annexure ''F'' and direct the 5th respondent to release the detenue, Sri V. Madhu @ Kaddi @ Doddi @ Naveen V. S/o. Varadaraj.

The brief facts of the case on hand are that the petitioner is the younger brother of detenue Sri V. Madhu @ Kaddi @ Doddi @ Naveen V. S/o. Varadaraj who has been detained under Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drugs offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, immoral Traffic offenders and Slum-Grabbers Act 1985. Since the detenue is unable to approach this Court challenging his illegal detention, the petitioner being the younger brother of detenue has filed this writ petition contending that his brother has been taken to custody on 10.02.2014 as per the detention order dated 10.02.2014 vide Annexures ''A'' and ''B'' on the ground that the detenue, by joining hands with other rowdy elements has been accused of being involved in committing many heinous offences i.e., robbery, dacoity and his conduct is prejudicial to the maintenance to the public order and the detaining authority has relied on 16 cases registered in Doddapet Police Station, Shimoga for various offences and that he was in judicial and police custody on different occasions for a cumulative period of more than 270 days. On the basis of the above materials and as the detenue has been involved in illegal activities and as charges against him are serious in nature and though he was in judicial custody, he has not stopped his criminal activities and therefore to prevent his illegal activities, which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, there was no other option except to pass the appropriate detention order and the said order has been confirmed by the detention authorities and the Government by its Order dated 28.03.2014, extended the detention for a period of 12 months from the date of detention order i.e., 10.02.2014.

Being aggrieved by the detention order, confirmation order and the extension of detention order, referred above, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking appropriate reliefs as stated supra.

The principal submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset is that the impugned detention order, confirmation order and the extension of detention order passed by the competent authorities cannot be sustained are liable to be set aside in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rushikesh Tanaji Bhoite Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, .

Per contra, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents contended and sought to substantiate the impugned orders passed by the competent authorities. However, he fairly submitted that in the light of the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court referred supra appropriate order may be passed in accordance with law.

After careful consideration of the submission made by learned counsel for both the parties, perusal of the impugned detention order, Confirmation order and extension of detention order passed by the competent authorities and other materials on record, it is manifest on the face of the same that the detenue has filed Crl. Misc. 1211/2013 on the file of the the Prl. Sessions Judge, Shimoga, in Crime No. 144/2013 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail on the file of the III Addl. JMFC, of Jayanagar Police Station, Shimoga. The said matter had come up for consideration on 01.01.2014. The learned Sessions Judge all owed the application granting bail subject to certain conditions. This aspect of the matter has not been looked into or considered before passing the detention order.

In the instant case, it can be seen that the detenue was already released on bail and the Detention Authority was not aware of the bail of the detenue. Taking into consideration all these aspects including the judgment of the Apex Court (supra), the impugned orders passed by the Competent Authorities cannot be sustained and are liable to be vitiated without going into any merits or demerits of the case.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The impugned order passed by the competent authority dated 10.02.2014 bearing No. MAG(1).CR.62/31476/2013-14, vide Annexure ''A'' and ''B'', Confirmation order dated 17.02.2014 bearing No. HD 61 SST 2014 vide Annexure ''E'' and Extension of Detention order dated 28.03.2014 bearing No. HD 61 SST 2014 vide Annexure ''F'' are hereby set aside and the 5th respondent is hereby directed to release Sri V. Madhu @ Kaddi @ Doddi @ Naveen V. S/o. Varadaraj aged about 25 years, 4th Cross, Jail Road, behind Subbaiah Complex, Hosmane Extension, Shimoga immediately if he is not required in any other case. Ordered accordingly.