Telangana High Court
Bhadhavath Lakpathi vs The State Of Telangana on 22 June, 2023
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K.Lakshman, P.Sree Sudha
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA
Writ Petition No.13122 of 2023
ORDER:(Per Honourable Sri Justice K. Lakshman) Heard Ms.R. Sowmy Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Special Government Pleader, representing the learned Additional Advocate-General, for the respondents.
2. This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings in Ref.No.C1/683/2023, dated 15.04.2023, (for short, 'the impugned detention order') and to release the detenu.
3. Petitioner herein is brother-in-law of the detenu, viz., Bhukya Veeranna.
4. The impugned detention order was passed by the 2nd respondent relying on the following five (05) crimes which are tabulated as under, viz., ::2:: KL,J & PSS,J wp_13122_2023 Sl. Crime No./ Section of law Figured Property Stage of No Date/ as seized the case . Station
1. 76/2022, 7(A), r/w 8(e) of Solo 60 kgs. of Jaggery; Notice u/S 20.05.2022 of A.P. Prohibition Accused 10 kgs. of Alum; 41-A Cr.P.C. P & E Station, Act, 1995 & 34 (e) 4 ltrs. of I.D. issued on Wardhanapet of A.P. Excise Act, Liquor; 26.07.2022.
1968 One Ashok Leyland
Trolley with Investigation
is pending.
2. 20/2022, 7(A), r/w 8(e) of A.1 800 kgs. of Black Notice u/S
26.07.2022 of A.P. Prohibition among Jaggery; 41-A Cr.P.C.
P & E Station, Act, 1995 & 34 (e) two 120 kgs. of Alum; issued on
Mothkur of A.P. Excise Act, persons 5 ltrs. of I.D. 26.07.2022.
1968 Liquor; and
One Ashok Leyland Investigation
trolley bearing is pending.
Reg.No.TS-04-UB-
9772
3. 208/2022, 7(A), r/w 8(e) of A.2 2,550 kgs. of Black Notice u/S
06.11.2022 of A.P. Prohibition among Jaggery; 41-A Cr.P.C.
P & E Station, Act, 1995 & 34 (e) two 300 kgs. of Alum; issued on
Wardhanapet of A.P. Excise Act, persons 20 ltrs. of I.D. 13.04.2022.
1968 Liquor; and
One Mahindra Investigation
Bolero Truck is pending.
bearing Reg.No.AP-
29-U-3592
4. 48/2023, 7(A), r/w 8(e) of Solo 300 kgs. of Black Notice u/S
17.02.2023 of A.P. Prohibition Accused Jaggery; 41-A Cr.P.C.
P & E Station, Act, 1995 & 34 (e) 100 kgs. of Alum; & issued on
Wardhanapet of A.P. Excise Act, 20 ltrs. of I.D. 13.04.2022.
1968 Liquor
Investigation
is pending.
5. 69/2023, 7(A), r/w 8(e) of A.1 500 kgs. of Black Notice u/S
21.02.2023 of A.P. Prohibition among Jaggery; 41-A Cr.P.C.
P & E Station, Act, 1995 & 34 (e) two 50 kgs. of Alum; issued on
Thorrur of A.P. Excise Act, persons 10 ltrs. of I.D. 13.04.2022.
1968 Liquor; &
One Trolley Auto Investigation
with registration is pending.
number
5. The punishment prescribed for the aforesaid offences is three (03) years. Therefore, Investigating Officers have already invoked the procedure laid down under Section 41-A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, 'the Cr.P.C.') by duly issuing notices on the detenu.
::3:: KL,J & PSS,J
wp_13122_2023
6. Thus, investigating Officers have set the criminal law into motion by registering the above crimes against the detenu. However, they have not taken any steps under Section 41-A(4) of Cr.P.C on the ground that the detenu is not cooperating with the Investigating Officers by furnishing relevant information and documents as sought by them. F.S.L. reports are awaited. According to the learned Special Government Pleader, once the Investigating Officers receive F.S.L. reports they would file charge-sheets in the aforesaid crimes.
7. The Telangana Excise Act, 1968 and the Telangana Prohibition and Excise Act, 1995 are special enactments and procedure is laid down under the said enactments to prosecute the accused who commits offence under the said enactments.
8. Considering the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ashok Kumar vs. Delhi Administration1, this Court, vide order dated 14.06.2023 in Writ Petition No.5743 of 2023 (wherein the detenu was involved in six criminal cases for the offences punishable under Telangana Excise Act and Telangana Prohibition Act), declared the detention order passed by the 2nd respondent therein as illegal, and set aside the same.
1
(1982) 2 S.C.C. 403
::4:: KL,J & PSS,J
wp_13122_2023
9. It is also relevant to note that the Honourable Apex Court and this Court have, time and again, categorically held that detention orders can be passed in rarest of rare cases, that too, to prevent a detenu from committing similar offence which would cause disturbance to public order, and the detaining authority has to draw distinction between "disturbance to public order" and "disturbance to law and order"; and the detaining authority shall consider the entire material on record to come to subjective satisfaction on the said aspects.
10. In the present case, the detention order was passed by the 2nd respondent against the detenu by relying on above five (05) crime. Thus, there is no mention in the detention order that the acts of the detenu had caused disturbance to public order. Without considering the said aspects, the 2nd respondent had passed the impugned detention order, dated 15.04.2022.
11. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned detention order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 15.04.2023 is illegal and the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, it is set aside.
::5:: KL,J & PSS,J
wp_13122_2023
12. The Writ Petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to set the detenu, viz., Bhukya Veeranna, S/o.Bhukya Venkatram, Aged : 28 years; Caste : ST Lambada, R/o.Gopya Thanda, H/o.Sannur (V), Rayaparthy (M), Warangal District, free forthwith if he is no longer required in any other criminal case. No costs.
13. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
__________________________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J __________________________________ P. SREE SUDHA, J Date : 22.06.2023 Note : Issue C.C. forthwith.
B/o.
Ndr