AVUNOORI PADMA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA
LAWS(APH)-2019-3-54
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on March 14,2019

Avunoori Padma Appellant
VERSUS
State of Telangana Respondents




JUDGEMENT

A. Rajasheker Reddy, J. - (1.)This Writ Petition is filed assailing the proceedings in Rc.No.C1/2185/2018, dated 30.07.2018 of respondent No. 2, whereby he has ordered the detention of one Avunuri Narayana Swamy @ Madhu @ Sathyam S/o.Late Ramulu , (for brevity, 'the detenue'), which is confirmed by the 1st respondent vide G.O.Rt. No.2285, General Administration (Spl.(Law & Order) Department, dated 24.10.2018, as illegal.
(2.)The sum and substance of the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition is that the detenue was falsely implicated in (1) Crime No.36 of 2018 at P.S.Komararam under Section 384 r/w 34 IPC; (2) Crime No.38 of 2018 at P.S.Komararam under sections 143, 148, 506, 384 r/w 149 IPC, Section 25(1)(a) Indian Arms Act; (3) Crime No.37 of 2018 at P.S.Gundala under Sections 384 r/w 34 IPC, Sections 25(1)(a) of Indian Arms Act; (4) Crime No.102 of 2018 at P.S.Yellandu under Sections 147, 148, 341, 352, 506 r/w 149 IPC, Section 25(1)(a) of Indian Arms Act and (5) Crime No.285 of 2018 at P.S.Subedari, Warangal District under Sections 386, 506 r/w 34 IPC on the allegation that he involved in offences like extortion, wrongfully restraining people and threatening and terrorizing the people. Though the detenue was granted bail in all the crimes, the impugned preventive detention order was passed by the 2nd respondent on 30.07.2018 against him under Sub-Section (2) of Section 3 of the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 (for brevity, 'the Act of 1986') holding him as a 'goonda' as defined under clause (g) of Section 2 of the Act of 1986 and that he was lodged in Warangal Central Prison. No documents are furnished to the detenue before passing the impugned detention order and that the same is without application of mind. The order of the 2nd respondent is confirmed by the 1st respondent, without there being any material on record against detenue.
(3.)Counter affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent denying the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition and justified the reasons for passing detention order against detenue.
;


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