Kerala High Court
Veenamol A.S vs State Of Kerala on 25 August, 2025
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
2025:KER:64836
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JOBIN SEBASTIAN
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 3RD BHADRA, 1947
WP(CRL.) NO. 1066 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
VEENAMOL A.S
AGED 24 YEARS
W/O JAMSHEER ALI, AYYAPPANKUNNU, KULAVAYAL, VTC:
MOOTTIL SOUTH, VYTHIRI, WAYANAD, PIN - 673122
BY ADVS.
SHRI.M.H.HANIS
SMT.T.N.LEKSHMI SHANKAR
SMT.NANCY MOL P.
SHRI.ANANDHU P.C.
SMT.NEETHU.G.NADH
SMT.RIA ELIZABETH T.J.
SHRI.SAHAD M. HANIS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, HOME AND VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673122
3 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
WAYANAD DISTRICT,, PIN - 673122
WP(Crl.) No.1066 of 2025 :: 2 ::
2025:KER:64836
4 THE CHAIRMAN,
ADVISORY BOARD, KAAPA, SREENIVAS, PADAM ROAD,
VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, ELAMAKKARA, ERNAKULAM.,
PIN - 682026
5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF JAIL,
HIGH SECURITY PRISON, VIYYUR,THRISSUR DIST,
PIN - 670004
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.A.ANAS, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 25.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
WP(Crl.) No.1066 of 2025 :: 3 ::
2025:KER:64836
JUDGMENT
Jobin Sebastian, J.
This writ petition has been directed against an order of detention
dated 18.06.2025 passed against one Jamsheer Ali K. under Section
3(1) of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 ('KAA(P)
Act' for brevity). The petitioner herein is the wife of the detenu.
2. The records available before us disclose that a proposal was
submitted by the District Police Chief, Wayanad, on 26.04.2025 seeking
initiation of proceedings under Section 3(1) of the KAA(P) Act before
the jurisdictional authority. For the purpose of initiation of the said
proceedings, the detenu was classified as a 'known goonda' as defined
under Section 2(o) of the KAA(P) Act. For passing the order of
detention the authority reckoned twelve cases in which the detenu got
involved. Out of the said cases, the case registered with respect to the
last prejudicial activity is crime No.119/2025 of Padinjarathara Police
Station alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections
20(b)(ii)B and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. We have heard Sri.M.H.Hanis, the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner and Sri. K.A. Anas, the learned Government Pleader.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
WP(Crl.) No.1066 of 2025 :: 4 ::
2025:KER:64836
impugned order is vitiated, as the same has been passed without
proper application of mind and in regard of the procedural safeguards
envisaged under the KAA(P) Act. According to the counsel, out of the
cases considered by the detaining authority, one of the cases
considered is crime No.158/2017 of Sholurmattum Police Station in
Tamil Nadu registered alleging commission of offence punishable
under Section 147, 148, 120B, 447, 458, 295, 324, 449, 396, 302 r/w
149 IPC. Although the records in this case were considered by the
detaining authority for arriving at the requisite objective as well as
subjective satisfaction, the copy of the said relied upon documents
served on the detenu were in Tamil, a language alien to the detenu.
According to the counsel, the non-service of the Malayalam translation
of those documents seriously prejudiced the document as he could not
file an effective representation before the Advisory Board and the
Government
4. In response, Sri. K.A. Anas, the learned Government Pleader,
the detaining authority passed Ext.P1 order after arriving at the
requisite objective as well as subjective satisfaction. According to the
counsel, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that
the detenu could not file an effective representation before the
Government and Advisory Board due to the non-service of certain
relied upon document is absolutely baseless. According to the
WP(Crl.) No.1066 of 2025 :: 5 ::
2025:KER:64836
Government Pleader, the detenu was fully aware of the details of the
cases which formed the basis for passing the impugned order and
hence, he could not be heard to say that he was handicapped in filing
an effective representation against the detention order.
5. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced and
have perused the records.
6. From the rival contentions raised, it is gatherable that the
main contention of the counsel for the detenu is that though a case
registered at Tamil Nadu alleging commission of an offence punishable
under Section 302 formed the basis for passing the impugned order,
the copy of the relied upon documents in the said case served on the
detenu were in Tamil language which the detenu is not accustomed to.
From a perusal of the documents, we are also convinced that the copy
of certain relied upon documents in the said case, served on the
detenu, is in Tamil language. Even the respondents do not have a case
that the detenu knows Tamil. Given the fact that the detenu knows only
Malayalam, it was incumbent upon the jurisdictional authority to serve
Malayalam translation of the relied-upon documents to the detenu.
Only when the documents relied upon are in a language known to the
detenu, then only he can file an effective representation before the
Advisory Board as well as the Government. Therefore, we also find
WP(Crl.) No.1066 of 2025 :: 6 ::
2025:KER:64836
some merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner
that the detenu was handicapped from filing an effective
representation, which is a constitutional as well as fundamental right
of a detenu.
7. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed and Ext.P1 order of
detention is set aside. The Superintendent of High Security Prison,
Viyyur is directed to release the detenu, Sri. Jamsheer Ali K. forthwith,
if his detention is not required in connection with any other case.
The Registry is directed to communicate the order to the
Superintendent of High Security Prison, Viyyur forthwith.
Sd/-
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
Sd/-
JOBIN SEBASTIAN
JUDGE
ANS
WP(Crl.) No.1066 of 2025 :: 7 ::
2025:KER:64836
APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 1066/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.
DCWYD/3509/2025 S2-(1) DATED 18.06.2025
OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
19.07.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE DETENU
BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT THROUGH JAIL
I.E. 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
19.07.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT
