DIPANKAR DATTA,J. - (1.)Leave granted.
THE JUDGMENT UNDER CHALLENGE

(2.)Under assail in this appeal is a judgment and order dtd. 28/6/2023 of a Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telangana ("High Court", hereafter). Vide the impugned judgment, a writ petition (W.P. No.9000 of 2023) instituted by the appellant seeking a writ of habeas corpus was dismissed and the order of detention dtd. 24/3/2023 ("Detention Order", hereafter) of the appellant's husband ("Detenu", hereafter), impugned therein, upheld.
THE ORDER OF DETENTION AND FURTHER PROCEEDINGS

(3.)The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City ("Commissioner", hereafter) passed the Detention Order against the Detenu under the provisions of sec. 3(2) of the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Land Grabbers, Spurious Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertiliser Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document Offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial Offenders Act 1986 ("the Act", hereafter). Perusal of the Detention Order reveals that the Detenu earlier suffered an order of detention dtd. 4/3/2021 under the category of "White Collar Offender"; however, pursuant to an order of the High Court dtd. 16/8/2021 in writ proceedings instituted by his father (W.P. No.12321 of 2021), the Detenu was released from detention on 17/8/2021; that even after such release, the Detenu did not mend his habitual nature of committing crimes and in the recent past (during 2022 and 2023), in quick succession, had committed 9 (nine) more offences within the limits of Hyderabad Police Commissionerate, as listed therein; that out of such 9 (nine) offences, 5 (five) FIRs [(i) FIR No. 227/2022 dtd. 28/7/2022 for offences under Ss. 186, 189, 353, 504, 506, IPC; (ii) FIR No. 262/2022 dtd. 10/10/2022 for offences under Ss. 420, 384, 506 r/w 34, IPC; (iii) FIR No. 338/2022 dtd. 12/10/2022 for offences under Ss. 354, 420, 323, 506 r/w 34, IPC; (iv) FIR No. 18/2023 dtd. 21/1/2023 for offences under Ss. 506, 420, 406 r/w 34, IPC; and (v) FIR No. 35/2023 dtd. 8/2/2023 for offences under Ss. 392, 195A, IPC] had been taken into consideration; and that on examination of the material placed before him, the Commissioner was satisfied that the Detenu was "habitually committing the offences including outraging the modesty of women, cheating, extortion, obstructing the public servants from discharging their legitimate duties, robbery and criminal intimidation along with his associates in an organized manner in the limits of .. and he is a 'Goonda' as defined in clause (g) of Sec. 2" of the Act (bold in original). The Commissioner, with a view to prevent the Detenu from acting in a manner prejudicial to maintenance of public order, recorded not only his satisfaction for invoking the provisions of the Act but also recorded a satisfaction that "the ordinary law under which he was booked is not sufficient to deal with the illegal activities of such an offender who has no regard for the society. Hence, unless he is detained under the detention laws, his unlawful activities cannot be curbed". After referring to the bail petitions filed by the Detenu in Cr.No.18/2023 of Golconda PS and Cr.No.35/2023 of Falaknuma PS and bail having been granted despite suitable counters filed by the prosecution resulting in the Detenu's release from jail, the Commissioner observed as follows:
"As seen from his past criminal history, background and antecedents and also his habitual nature of committing crimes one after the other and his efforts to come out of the prison, I strongly believe that if such a habitual criminal is set free, his activities would not be safe to the society and there is an imminent possibility of his committing similar offences by violating the bail conditions in one of the cases which would be detrimental to public order, unless he is preventively detained from doing so by an appropriate order of detention."

This was followed by the order detaining the Detenu, treated as a 'Goonda', from the date of service of the same with a direction to lodge him in Central Prison, Chanchalguda, Hyderabad.