Decided on February 19,2019

Peddireddy Sireesha Appellant
Collector And District Magistrate, Kurnool District And Ors. Respondents


C.Praveen Kumar, J. - (1.)The husband of the petitioner, by name Peddireddy Konda Reddy S/o. Late Narasimha Reddy, was subjected to preventive detention under Section 3(2) read with 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 (for short, 'the Act'), under order dated 28.11.2018 of the Collector & District Magistrate, Kurnool District. His detention was approved by the Government vide G.O.Rt. No.2555, General Administration (SCI.) Department, dated 06.12.2018. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce the detenu before this Court and set him at liberty, by declaring the detention order dated 28.11.2018 and the consequential G.O.Rt.No.2555 dated 06.12.2018 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 22 of the Constitution of India.
(2.)The record reflects that after the approval of the order of detention by the Government, the matter was referred to the Advisory Board under Section 10 of the Act. Thereupon, the Advisory Board reviewed the matter and submitted a report to the Government on 20.12.2018 under Section 11(1) of the Act, opining that there was sufficient cause for the detention of the detenu. After consideration of the said report, the Government confirmed the detention of the petitioner's husband and directed that his detention shall be continued for a period of 12 months from the date of his detention, i.e., 30.11.2018, vide G.O. Rt. No. 17, General Administration (SCI) Department, dated 02.01.2019.
(3.)The order of detention referred to eight crimes in which the detenu was alleged to have been involved. Out of them, four crimes were registered for the offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code and the remaining four crimes were registered under the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code for breach of peace. The detenu was acquitted in the cases registered for the offences under the Indian Penal Code and insofar as the offences under the Code of Criminal Procedure, he was bound over by the concerned authority. Having referred to the eight crimes registered against the detenu, the detaining authority observed that the detenu has been motivating innocent youth towards committing of both property and bodily offences and due to his motivation, the common youth of Chinna Kandukuru, Allagadda and surrounding villages were involved in several offences and that the detenu, by maintaining a gang and operating in the commission of offences armed with deadly weapons, has been causing breach of public peace and tranquillity. The detenu and his henchmen have been damaging the public property and thereby, exhibiting highhanded behaviour in the areas, affecting the public order. Thus, the detaining authority held that the detenu falls under the definition of 'Goonda' under the Act and he is required to be detained, and accordingly, passed the order of detention under challenge.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.