Kerala High Court
Bindhu Jayan vs State Of Kerala on 20 May, 2024
Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 30TH VAISAKHA, 1946
WP(CRL.) NO. 404 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
BINDHU JAYAN, AGED 44 YEARS, W/O JAYAN,
KALARIKKALHOUSE,KANJIRAMKULAM KARA,
KURAVILANGADU VILLAGE, KOTTYAM DISTRICT., PIN -
686 633
BY ADV AJEESH M UMMER
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
CHIEFSECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOMEDEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN
- 695 001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
KOTTAYAM., PIN - 686 002
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KURAVILANGAD POLICE
STATION KURAVILANGAD., PIN - 686 633
4 THE CITY POLICE CHIEF, KOTTYAM, PIN - 686 002
5 THE CHAIRMAN, ADVISORY BOARD ,KAAPA, SREENIVAS,
PADAMROAD,VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, ELAMAKKARA, PIN -
682 026
6 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF JAIL, CENTRAL JAIL,
KANNUR, PIN - 670 004
BY ADVS.
ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION(AG-11)
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(AG-28)
W.P.(Crl.)No.404 of 2024
..2..
K.A. ANAS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 20.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(Crl.)No.404 of 2024
..3..
JUDGMENT
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.
The petitioner is the wife of the detenu. This is the
second detention order passed against the detenu. He is
ordered to be detained for a period of one year. The last
crime was registered on 30.07.2023. The crime happened to
be registered on the allegation that while consuming alcohol
by the detenu along with his friends, the detenu heard the
victim abusing victim's wife over phone and that was
questioned by the detenu. Infuriated by the same, the detenu
assaulted and threatened the victim and this led to the
registration of the case.
2. Considering the nature of offence registered
against the detenu, we are of the view that it is only a matter
affecting law and order. A mere registration of the crime
itself will not be sufficient to invoke provisions under the
KAAPA Act unless such crime is of a grave nature which would
vitiate public order. The detaining authority should apply its
mind while passing a detention order and find out the nature
of offence and its gravity, that would have an impact on
vitiating a public order. Merely because he is involved in a
..4..
crime after suffering earlier detention order itself does not
mean that the provisions under the KAAPA Act can be invoked
against such person. The detaining authority must take into
account all the attentive circumstances to arrive at a
conclusion that the detenu, if not prevented by the detention
order, would further commit such offences. Isolated incidents
like this cannot be a subject matter for passing the detention
order.
3. Taking note of the nature of offence, we are of the
view that the impugned order has to be set aside.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. We order
release of the detenu forthwith, provided, if he is not
otherwise required in any case under law.
This W.P.Crl. is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
JUDGE
Sd/-
S.MANU
JUDGE
PR
..5..
APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 404/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO
DCKTM/8915/2023-H1 DATED 20.10.2023
ALONG WITH DOCUMENTS RECEIVED AS SUCH
