Telangana High Court
Pallapu Lavanya vs The State Of Telangana on 5 October, 2023
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
AND
HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
WRIT PETITION No.18964 of 2023
ORDER:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman) Heard Smt.Ravula Sowmya Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Godugu Mallesham, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing learned Additional Advocate General. Perused the record.
2. This Writ Petition is filed to issue Writ of Habeas Corpus to declare the detention order vide Proc.No.C1/716/2023, dated 05-07-2023 issued by respondent No.2 whereby and whereunder detaining the husband of the petitioner by name Mr.Pallapu Devaraju and consequential confirmation order, if any, as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unilateral, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and to forthwith release the detenu. 2
3. Impugned detention order was passed by respondent No.2 relying on following two ground cases :
I). Crime No.66 of 2023 pending on the file of Konaraopet Police Station, Rajanna-Sircilla District for the offences punishable under Sections 304-II of IPC and Section 3(ii)(iii) of SCs&STs (POA) Act. The allegations leveled against the detenu are as follows:
"On 06.04.2023 at 1100 hours, the complainant Bhukya Vijaya W/o.Kishore, 26 yrs, Caste:Lambada (ST), Occ:Coolie, r/o.Jai Sevalal Bhukyareddy Thanda (v) of Konaraopet mandal has lodged a complaint at Konaraopet Police station sating that her husband / deceased Bhukya Kishore S/o.Balu, age 28 years eking out his livelihood by running Tractor. Due to heat condition in summer season, her husband used to go to plough the land in the night hours. As usually, on 06.04.2023 at about 0100 hours, her husband took his tractor and went along with tractor of Lakavath Raju to plough the land of one Lokurthy Mallesham r/o.Marrimandla village with drivers Guguloth Gangadhar R/o.Lachapeta Thanda and Guguloth Bhupathi r/o.Jalapathi Thanda. Later, she came to know that her husband was accidentally touched the electricity wire at Wood Apple trees situated in 3 Marrimadla forest. On that, she went to the spot along with her relatives and villagers and found that her husband was died with burnt injuries to the left hand and leg. Later she came to know that, while her husband was going in advance by showing the way to tractor drivers on his motor cycle, on the way at about 01.50 hours, when he reached to Wood Apple trees at Marrimadla forest, he accidently touched to the electrical supplied wire resulting received electric shock and died, which is erected by some unknown accused persons in order to hunt the wild animals by knowingly that if any human lives touch the wire they might have died. Due to dark night the decease unable to observe the wire and touched that wire and died due to electric shock. The same was witnessed by Tractor drivers Gugulothu Gangadhar, Gugulothu Bhupathi and land owner Lokurthy Mallesham. Later the complainant along with her relatives shifted the dead body of the deceased and kept in the mortuary room of Govt. Hqrs. Hospital, Sircilla for safety."
II) Crime No.67 of 2023 pending on the file of Konaraopet Police Station, Rajanna-Sircilla Districtfor the offences punishable under Sections 307 r/w.149 of IPC and Section 3(ii)(iii) of SCs&STs (POA) Act. The allegations leveled against the detenu are as follows: 4
"On 08.04.2023 at 1000 hours, the complainant Guguloth Parsharam, S/o.Perrya, 40 yrs, Caste:Lambada, Occ: Agriculture, r/o.Govindaraopet thanda (v) of Konaraopet mandal has lodged a complaint at PS Konaraopet sating that he is eking out his livelihood by doing agriculture. He is having agricultural land beside the hillocks of his village. The wild animals are used to cause damage to their crops. For which they used to go to their fields to save their crops from the wild animals. In this juncture the villagers of Bandlapalli village who belongs to Waddera by caste used to hunt the wild animals by arranging electric supply wires in the forest. Noticing the same the complainant raised objection and warned them for erected electric supply wires as it is endanger to the human lives, even though they deaf ear his words and used to erect the electric supply wires in the forest for hunting wild animals. On 31.03.2023 at 23.30 hours the Waddera caste persons who are belongs to Bandlapalli village were erected wires across the way which is leading to his fields with an intention to kill him and connected to the live electric pole wires and waiting in the bushes in the forest. But he along with their villager Angothu Thirupathi were observed the electric supplied wires and escaped from the plan of waddera caste persons. Having seen the same they escaped from the scene. Later he knew the persons who laid the electric supply wires with an intention to kill him namely 5 (1)Pallapu Devaraju S/o Bheemaiah, (2) Manjala Chandu S/o.Reddy, (3) Gogula Venkatesh S/o.Kanakaiah, (4) Vemula Suresh S/o.Yellaiah, (5)Gogula Kanakaiah, S/o.Borraiah, (6) Pallapu Rajesham, S/o.Karre Yellaiah, (7) Pallapu Ganesh and (8) Pallapu Rakesh, S/o.Kanakaiah all are belongs to Waddera by caste and R/o.Bandlapalli village of Chandurthy mandal. Finally he requested to take necessary action.
Court below granted bail to the detenu in Crime Nos.66 and 67 of 2023 on imposition of certain conditions on 03-06-2023. There is no allegation against the detenu that he has violated any of the conditions imposed by the Court below. However, the Investigating Officers, on completion of investigation, laid charge sheets against him. They are at PRC stage and PRC numbers are awaited.
4. It is relevant to note that the Investigating Officer in Crime No.67 of 2023 did not file any application to cancel the bail granted to the detenu on the ground that he has committed similar offence by violating the conditions 6 imposed by the Court below while granting bail in Crime No.66 of 2023.
5. Thus, the aforesaid facts and allegations leveled against the detenu would reveal that there is no disturbance to the public order due to the alleged acts of the detenu. Even then, without considering the entire material on record and also the fact that the Criminal law was already set on motion, respondent No.2 has passed the impugned detention order.
6. Hon'ble Apex Court in Ashok Kumar Vs. Delhi Administration 1 the Hon'ble Apex Court held that preventive detention is devised to afford protection to society. The object is to punish a man for having done something but to intercept before he does it to prevent him from doing.
7. In Ram Manohar Lohia Vs. State of Bihar 2 the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows:
1
(1982) 2 SCC 403 2 (1966) 1 SCR 709 7 "Does the expression "public order' take in every kind of disorder or only some? The answer to this serves to distinguish "public order" from "law and order"
because the latter undoubtedly takes in all of them. Public order if disturbed, must lead to public disorder. Every breach of the peace does not lead to public disorder. When two drunkards quarrel and fight there is disorder but not public disorder. They can be dealt with under the powers to maintain law and order but cannot be detained on the ground that they were disturbing public order. Suppose that the two fighters were of rival communities and one of them tried to raise communal passions. The problem is still one of law and order but it raises the apprehension of public disorder. Other examples can be imagined.
The contravention of law always affects order but before it can be said to affect public order, it must affect the community or the public at large.
A mere disturbance of law and order leading to disorder is thus not necessarily sufficient for action under the Defence of India Act but disturbances which subvert the public order are. A District Magistrate is entitled to take action under Rule 30(1)(b) to prevent subversion of public order but not in aid of 8 maintenance of law and order under ordinary circumstances.
It will thus appear that just as "public order" in the rulings of this Court (earlier cited) was said to comprehend disorders of less gravity than those affecting "security of State", "law and order" also comprehends disorders of less gravity than those affecting public order".
One has to imagine three concentric circles. Law and order represents the largest circle within which is the next circle representing public order and the smallest circle represents security of State.
8. In Vijay Narain Singh v. State of Bihar 3, the Hon'ble Supreme Court explained the phrase 'habitual criminal' as follows:
"12. A person is habitual criminal who by force of-habit or inward disposition, inherent or latent in him, has grown accustomed to lead a life of crime. It is the force of habit inherent or latent in an individual with a criminal instinct, with a criminal disposition of mind, that makes him dangerous to the society in general. In 3 (1984) 3 SCC 14.9
simple language the word 'habitually' means 'by force of habit'."
9. It is relevant to note that Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court in catena of decisions categorically held that detaining authority shall consider the entire material while passing detention order by invoking their powers under Act 1 of 1986. They have to come to subjective satisfaction before passing detention orders with regard to disturbance caused to public order due to the acts committed by the detenue. In rarest of rare cases, that too, to prevent the detenue from committing similar offences which will disturb the public order, Act 1 of 1986 shall be invoked by issuing preventive detention order.
10. As discussed supra, in the present case, there is no consideration of the said aspects by the detaining authority and the same are lacking.
11. However, in the light of the aforesaid discussion, according to us, impugned detention order vide 10 proceedings detention order vide Proc.No.C1/716/2023, dated 05-07-2023 passed by respondent No.2 is liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside.
12. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the detention order vide proceedings No.C1/716/2023, dated 05-07-2023 passed by respondent No.2 is set aside. Respondents are directed to set the detenu viz., Mr.Pallapu Devaraju, S/o.Bheemaiah, age 39 years, free, if he is no longer required in any other criminal case. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.
____________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J _________________ K. SUJANA, J October 05, 2023 PN 11 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN AND HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA WRIT PETITION No.18964 of 2023 (per Hon'ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman) October 05, 2023 PN