Kerala High Court
Muhammed Althaf vs State Of Kerala on 1 August, 2024
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1946
WP(CRL.) NO. 729 OF 2024
CRIME NO.1302/2023 OF TOWN WEST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
MUHAMMED ALTHAF, AGED 23 YEARS
S/O ABDUL MANAF, KALIYATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, DIVANJIMOOLA
DESAM, VELIYANNOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680021
BY ADVS.
JERRY MATHEW ; VIJAYA N.V.
RESPONDENTS/STATE & ORS.:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF
KERALA(HOME DEPARTMENT),SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
RANGE OFFICE, THRISSUR CHEMBOOKAVU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680020
3 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRISSUR CITY, RAMAVARMAPURAM
THRISSUR, PIN - 680631
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TOWN EAST POLICE STATION THRISSUR,
VELIYANOOR, PIN - 680001
BY ADVS.
ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION(AG-11)
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(AG-28)
SRI KA ANAZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.08.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2
W.P.(Crl) No.729/2024
JUDGMENT
G.Girish, J.
The order dated 29.05.2024 of the Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Thrissur Range (Authorised Officer) directing the externment of the
petitioner from Thrissur Revenue District for a period of one year under
Section 15(1)(a) of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities Prevention Act [for short
'KAA(P)A'], is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The District Police Chief, Thrissur City (Sponsoring Authority) by
his report dated 04.05.2024 (Ext.P6) recommended the externment of the
petitioner for maximum period from Thrissur Revenue District stating the
reason that the petitioner has been indulging in anti-social activities causing
disruption to public order. The three cases shown in the following table were
mentioned in Ext.P6 report for considering the petitioner as a 'known
rowdy':
Sl.No. Crime No. Offences Present Status
1 1375/2019 of u/s 294(b), 323, Case is pending before the
Thrissur Town 341 and 506 IPC Judicial First Class Magistrate
East Police read with Section Court-I, Thrissur for trial as
Station 34 IPC C.C.No.333/2020
2 993/2023 of Case is pending before the
Thrissur Town u/s 294(b), 323 and Judicial First Class Magistrate
East Police 341 IPC Court-I, Thrissur for trial as
3 1302/2023 of u/s 143, 147, 148, Case is pending before the
Thrissur Town 323, 324, 307, 302, Judicial First Class Magistrate
West Police 120(B) r/w Section Court-II, Thrissur as
Station 149 IPC C.P.No.09/2024 for committal
proceedings.
3. In addition to the above information, the Sponsoring Authority
reported to the Authorised Officer that proceedings under Section 107 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure are pending against the petitioner before the Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Thrissur as M.C.No.819/2023. In all the aforesaid
cases, the petitioner was reported to be on bail.
4. The Authorised Officer issued Ext.P2 show cause notice dated
18.05.2024 to the petitioner calling for his explanation why an order of
externment restricting his entry into the Thrissur Revenue District shall not
be passed against him. The petitioner appeared in person before the
Authorised Officer on 23.05.2024 and stated that he was totally innocent in
all the aforesaid cases and requested to close the proceedings against him.
Finding that the explanation offered orally by the petitioner was not
satisfactory, the Authorised Officer passed Ext.P1 externment order, which
was served on the petitioner on 15.06.2024 and executed on 30.06.2024.
5. In the present petition, the petitioner would contend that the
Authorised Officer passed the impugned order flouting the mandate of law,
and that the said order is vitiated by various fatal procedural violations.
6. The Authorised Officer who has been arraigned as the 2nd
respondent in this petition, filed counter affidavit through the learned Public
Prosecutor affirming her observations in Ext.P1 order for restricting the entry
of the petitioner to Thrissur Revenue District for a period of one year.
7. Heard Adv.Mr.Jerry Mathew, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.K.A.Anaz, the learned Senior Government Pleader
representing the respondents.
8. In all the three crimes relied on by the Authorised Officer for
classifying the petitioner as a 'known rowdy', the petitioner is on bail. As
shown in the table above, the offences alleged against the petitioner in the
first two cases are of trivial nature. However, the third crime which is
considered as the last prejudicial activity of the petitioner, is in respect of the
offence of murder, in which he is arraigned as the 1st accused.
9. The date of commission of the last crime alleged against the
petitioner is 06.11.2023, and he is said to have been arrested on 07.11.2023.
The petitioner remained in judicial custody in connection with the aforesaid
case till 20.02.2024. On 20.02.2024, the petitioner was released on bail
subject to strict conditions vide Ext.P7 order of the learned Sessions Judge,
Thrissur. Thereafter on 15.03.2024, the Inspector of Police, Thrissur Town
East Police Station submitted Ext.P4 letter to the District Police Chief,
Thrissur City through Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thrissur, requesting
to initiate the proceedings for externment of the petitioner. The Assistant
Commissioner of Police, Thrissur forwarded the above request to the District
Police Chief, Thrissur City vide Ext.P5 letter on 16.03.2024. Thereafter, the
District Police Chief, Thrissur City is seen to have made Ext.P6 request to the
Authorised Officer only on 04.05.2024 for proceeding against the petitioner
under Section 15(1)(a) of KAA(P)A. Acting upon Ext.P6 request, the
Authorised Officer issued Ext.P2 show cause notice on 18.05.2024, and
Ext.P1 externment order on 29.05.2024.
10. It is apparent from the chronological events mentioned in the
aforesaid paragraph that there occurred a delay of six months and 21 days
from the date of last prejudicial activity attributed to the petitioner, for
initiating the proceedings under Section 15(1)(a) of KAA(P)A by the
Authorised Officer. So also, there is a delay of 74 days from the date of
Ext.P4 recommendation of the Station House Officer concerned, in passing
Ext.P1 order of externment. Ext.P6 report of the Sponsoring Authority is
seen made after about 50 days from Ext.P4 recommendation of the Station
House Officer, Thrissur Town East Police Station for initiating proceedings of
externment against the petitioner. There is absolutely no plausible
explanation offered by the authorities concerned for the delay in taking
appropriate steps in the above regard in connection with the proceedings
initiated against the petitioner.
11. In view of the above inordinate and unexplained delay of more
than 6 months and 21 days from the last prejudicial activity attributed to the
petitioner, for initiating the proceedings under Section 15(1)(a) of the
KAA(P)A, it has to be taken that the live-link between the last prejudicial
activity reckoned for classification of the petitioner as 'known rowdy', and the
order of externment has been snapped. In Shamnad Amiyan v. State of
Kerala [2023 KHC 271], a Division Bench of this Court has held that when
the delay from the last prejudicial activity and the issuance of externment
order has not been explained, and it is inordinate, the live-link and proximate
link has been snapped which invites the interdiction of High Court in judicial
review. That was a case where the Station House Officer concerned gave
the report dated 01.07.2022 to the District Police Chief, who in turn, had
approached the Deputy Inspector General of Police, only on 21.07.2022 with
the recommendation to initiate proceedings under Section 15(1)(a) of
KAA(P)A against the offender. As far as the present case is concerned, as
already stated above, the District Police Chief, Thrissur City is seen to have
sat over Ext.P4 report dated 15.03.2024 of the Station House Officer,
Thrissur East Police Station till 04.05.2024, without approaching the
Authorized Officer. So also, it could be seen that the long delay of more than
6½ months from the last prejudicial activity of the petitioner, to the
impugned order, could not be explained satisfactorily by the authorities
concerned.
12. Thus, the impugned order of externment passed by the
Authorized Officer is liable to be interfered with upon the ground of
inordinate and unexplained delay in taking prompt steps.
For the aforesaid reasons, we find that Ext.P1 order passed by the
Authorized Officer sans legal sanctity, and it is accordingly set aside.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,
JUDGE
Sd/-
G.GIRISH,
JUDGE
jsr/vgd
APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) NO.729/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF EXTERNMENT NO.
B3-8870/2024/TSR DATED 29.05.2024 ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 15(1)(A) OF KERALA
ANTI SOCIAL ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) ACT 2007
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.
B3-8870/2024/TSR DATED 18.05.2024 ISSUED BY
RESPONDENT NO.2
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION IN THIS
REGARD
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.03.2024
203/TDR/ITE/2024 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16.03.2023
BEARING NO. 06/KAAPA/TSD/24
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 04.05.2024 NO.
77/KAAPA/SB/RC/2024
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER OF HON'BLE SESSIONS
COURT, THRISSUR IN CRL.M.C.NO. 214/2024 DATED
20.02.2024
