MANU/SC/0659/2017

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 965 of 2017 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3651 of 2017)

Decided On: 24.05.2017

Appellants: V. Shantha Vs. Respondent: State of Telangana and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
L. Nageswara Rao and Navin Sinha

JUDGMENT

Navin Sinha, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The Appellant assails the order of preventive detention of her husband dated 17.10.2016, passed by Respondent No. 2, under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 (Act No. 1 of 1986) (Telangana Adaptation) Order, 2015, (G.O. Ms. No. 124, Dated 17.03.2015) (hereinafter referred to as the Act').

3. Ms. Prerna Singh, learned Counsel for the Appellant, submits that an order of preventive detention is a serious matter affecting the liberty of the citizen. It cannot be resorted to when sufficient remedies are available under the general laws of the land for any omission or commission under such laws. The detenu was already being prosecuted under the penal code and the Seeds Act. Reliance was placed on Rekha v. State of Tamil Nadu and Anr., MANU/SC/0366/2011 : (2011) 5 SCC 244.

4. It was next submitted that the detenu was already in custody in two other cases. The order of detention does not consider the same, setting out special reasons for an order of preventive detention, with regard to a person already in custody. The reasoning that there was every likelihood of his being released on bail, in view of an earlier bail order in a similar case, is flawed, as the detenu has not even filed any application for bail in these two cases.

5. Ms. Bina Madhavan, learned Counsel for the Respondents, opposing the application, submits that the grounds of detention cannot be seen simpliciter as individual wrongs amenable to ordinary laws. It has the potential to disturb maintenance of public order. More than one farmer had lodged complaints with regard to the spurious seeds sold to them. Wrongful loss had been caused to the poor farmers, and the detenu had acquired illegal gains at their expense.

6. We have considered the submissions. The order of preventive detention has been made Under Section 3 (1) and (2) read with Section 2 (a) and (b) of the Act.

7. Section 3 of the Act empowers the Government if satisfied, inter alia, with respect to a "Goonda" to detain such person with the view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

8. Section 2(a) of the Act defines "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order" as follows:

2(a) "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order" means when a bootlegger, a dacoit, a drug-offender, a goonda, an immoral traffic offender or a land-grabber is engaged or is making preparations for engaging, in any of his activities as such, which affect adversely, or are likely to affect adversely, the maintenance of public order:

Explanation: - For the purpose of this Clause public order shall be deemed to have been affected adv........