Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
B Aruna vs The State Of Ap on 18 October, 2023
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No.21369 of 2023
ORDER:(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Tarlada Rajasekjhar Rao) The present Writ Petition for habeas corpus is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to produce the detenu-Bangari Venkata Ramana, son of late G.Gumpayya, before this Court by setting aside the detention order No.(M)RC.No.1395/ 2023/ dated 21.07.2023 passed by the 2nd respondent-the Collector and District Magistrate and the approval order, vide G.O.Rt.No.1501 dated 31.07.2023 and the confirmation order, vide G.O.Rt.No.1846 dated 19.09.2023 passed by the 1st respondent, as they are illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Syed Khadir Masthan, learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of the learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents.
3. The present Writ Petition is filed by the wife of the detenu- Bangari Venkata Ramana. The 2nd respondent-the Collector and District Magistrate, on the recommendation of the sponsoring 2 authority, has passed the detention order dated 21.07.2023, as the detenu was involved in as many as six (6) crimes, which are:
(1) Crime No.642 of 2020 dated 05.12.2020 of Parvathipuram SEB Station, (2) Crime No.674 of 2020 dated 31.12.2020 of Parvathipuram SEB Station, (3) Crime No.416 of 2020 dated 28.12.2021 of Parvcathipuram SEB Station, (4) Crime No.161 of 2022 dated 16.08.2022 of Garugubilli Police Station, (5) Crime No.199 of 2022 dated 13.10.2022 of Garugubilli Police Station, and (6) Crime No.62 of 2023 dated 05.04.2023 of Parvathipuram SEB Station; and all the said crimes are registered for the offences punishable under Sections 7A and 7B read with Section 8(e) of Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995, and the Special Enforcement Bureau has sent the seized illicitly distilled liquor to the Regional Excise Laboratory for examination and the Regional Excise Laboratory, Visakhapatnam, has opined that the illicitly distilled liquor seized from the detenu contains ethyl alcohol, acidity and fusel oil tests and all were given positive results and finally he opined that the samples examined are illicit distilled liquor and unfit for human consumption and injurious to health and causing huge damage to the public health and public safety. Therefore, it is necessitated to pass the detention order, as the detenu squarely falls under the definition of 'boot-legger' under Section 2(b) of the 3 Act, and by exercising the power conferred under Section 3(1)&(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-
Leggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 (hereinafter called 'the Act', for short), has passed the present detention order.
4. Assailing the said order of detention, the present Writ Petition came to be filed on the grounds that:
(i) no such detention order shall remain in force for more than 12 days after making thereof unless in the meantime, it has been approved by the Government;
(ii) in the present case, the 2nd respondent though passed the detention order on 21.07.2023, the same has not been approved by the 1st respondent-Government till date and the detenu has not received any approved proceedings from the 1st respondent-Government even as on the date of filing this Writ Petition and a period of 28 days has been elapsed from the date of passing the impugned detention order;
(iii) and if at all, the detenu has misused the bail orders granted by the Court they can as well seek for cancellation of the bails under the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure instead of passing the detention order; and 4
(iv) the detenu is the only bread winner of the family and therefore prays to set aside the detention order and the consequential confirmation order.
5. The 2nd respondent-detaining authority has filed its counter asserting that the detenu was indulged in the activities of transporting, supplying and selling of illicitly distilled liquor and the said act is prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and the tranquility and the public life, as the activities of the detenu are causing huge damage to the public health and safety, particularly, the under-privileged and downtrodden people and the analyst has opined that the seized liquor from the detenu is unfit for human consumption and injurious to public health and in extreme cases, it may lead to death and the seized liquor contains fusel oils and other impurities which may cause huge damage to public health and therefore the detenu is a bootlegger under Section 2(a)&(b) of the Act.
6. It is submitted that pursuant to the detention order passed by the detaining authority, the detenu was taken into custody on 24.07.2023 and forwarded to Central Prison, Visakhapatnam, on 25.07.2023 and served the detention order, grounds of detention and material relied on for passing the same to the detenu in English 5 and Telugu languages under acknowledgment and the Superintendent of Jails, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam, has issued an acknowledgment dated 25.07.2023 to the said effect and the arrest intimation was given to the detenu's wife who is the petitioner herein on the same day i.e., 24.07.2023 under acknowledgment.
7. It is also stated in the counter that they have followed the procedure as contemplated under the Act and the approval order was passed on 31.07.2023 and the detention order is dated 24.07.2023 and hence denying the assertions made in the writ affidavit that no approval order is passed till the date of filing of the Writ Petition, the detaining authority has prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. The G.O.Rt.No.1501 dated 31.07.2023 filed along with counter indicates that approval order was passed in time.
8. The present Writ Petition is filed assailing the detention order on the ground that no approval order was passed by the Government within the stipulated time of 12 days and even if the authorities are of the opinion that the detenu is involved in series of crimes after getting bails and misusing the process of justice, they could seek for cancellation of bail under the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the detenu is the sole breadwinner of the family and therefore on the above said grounds, it prayed to set aside the detention order.
6
9. Learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the seized illicitly distilled liquor was sent to the analyst and the analyst has opined that it is dangerous to the public health and, in similar circumstances, this Court has dismissed the Writ Petition filed on behalf of the detenu and the said matter was carried to the Apex Court and the Apex Court has confirmed the same and therefore he would rely on the said judgment of the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.-- of 2023, arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No.9492 of 2023 in the case of Pesala Nookaraju v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh and others, wherein the Apex Court after considering catena of decisions of the Apex Court, held as follows:
"In the case on hand, the detaining authority has specifically stated in the grounds of detention that selling liquor by the appellant detenu and the consumption by the people of that locality was harmful to their health. Such statement is an expression of his subjective satisfaction that the activities of the detenu appellant is prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Not only that, the detaining authority has also recorded his satisfaction that it is necessary to prevent the detenu appellant from indulging further in such activities and this satisfaction has been drawn on the basis of the credible material on record. It is also well settled that whether the material was sufficient or not is not for the Courts to decide by applying the objective basis as it is matter of subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority."
10. In the present case, it is the specific case of the detaining authority that the detenu is indulging in bootlegging activities and 7 the detenu is taking active part in such dangerous activities and the seized liquor was sent to the analyst and the analyst has opined that it would have impact on the public health in the locality and in some times it may lead to death of the consumers of the said liquor and there is sufficient material to arrive at the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority.
11. In the said circumstances, the Apex Court said that the detention order is valid and the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority is within the realm of the detaining authority and it is also observed by the Apex Court that it is well settled law that whether the material is sufficient or not is not for the Courts to decide by applying the objective basis as it is the matter of the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority.
12. As seen from the grounds raised in the writ affidavit, no valid grounds are raised in the writ affidavit to annul the impugned order of detention. As rightly contested by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and after perusal of the detention order and the analyst report, wherein the analyst has categorically stated that the seized liquor affects the human health and in some cases, it may lead to death. In view of the judgment of the Apex Court referred supra, this Court did not find any valid reasons to meddle with the 8 order of detention, as the order of detention is valid in law. Hence, we found no reasons to interfere with the order of detention.
13. Resultantly, the present Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
14. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this case, shall stand closed.
________________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY ________________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 18.10.2023 siva 9 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.21369 of 2023 Date: 18.10.2023 siva