[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Rukiya vs State Of Kerala on 1 December, 2025
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
2025:KER:92587
WP(Crl.) No.1575 of 2025
1
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 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA,
1947
WP(CRL.) NO. 1575 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
RUKIYA
AGED 57 YEARS
W/O MOHAMMED, BUSHARA MANZIL, NEAR H.P.GAS
OFFICE, HOSANGADI, BANGRA, MANJESWARAM,
KASARGODE, PIN - 671323
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
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY
TO GOVERNMENT, HOME AND VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,,
PIN - 695001
2025:KER:92587
WP(Crl.) No.1575 of 2025
2
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
KASARGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671123
3 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
KASARGOD, PIN - 671123
4 THE CHAIRMAN,
ADVISORY BOARD, KAAPA, SREENIVAS, PADAM ROAD,
VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, ELAMAKKARA,ERNAKULAM DIST,
PIN - 682026
5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF JAIL,
CENTRAL PRISON, KANNUR, PIN - 670004
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.K.A.ANAS, GP.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:92587
WP(Crl.) No.1575 of 2025
3
JUDGMENT
Jobin Sebastian, J.
This writ petition has been directed against an order of
detention dated 06.10.2025, passed against one Saifudeen @ Saifu @
Poocha Saifu under Section 3(1) of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities
(Prevention) Act, 2007 ('KAA(P) Act' for brevity). The petitioner
herein is the mother of the detenu.
2. The records available before us disclose that a proposal
was submitted by the District Police Chief, Kasaragod, on 11.09.2025,
seeking initiation of proceedings under Section 3(1) of the KAA(P) Act
against the detenu before the jurisdictional authority. For the purpose
of initiation of the said proceedings, the detenu was classified as a
'known rowdy' as defined under Section 2(p)(iii) of the KAA(P) Act.
Altogether, five cases in which the detenu got involved were
considered by the jurisdictional authority while passing the detention
order. Out of the said cases, the case registered with respect to the
last prejudicial activity is crime No.716/2025 of Manjeswaram Police
Station alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections
127(2), 140(1), 306(2), 115(2), 310(2) r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita (for short 'BNS').
3. We have heard Sri.M.H.Hanis, the learned counsel
2025:KER:92587
appearing for the petitioner, and Sri. K.A. Anas, the learned
Government Pleader.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
the impugned order is vitiated, as the same has been passed without
proper application of mind and in disregard of the procedural
safeguards envisaged under the KAA(P) Act. According to the
counsel, among the documents supplied along with Ext. P1 order,
some of the documents are in the Kannada language. The learned
counsel contended that although those records were also considered
by the jurisdictional authority for arriving at the requisite objective as
well as subjective satisfaction, the translated copy of the said relied-
upon documents was not served on the detenu, who does not know
Kannada. According to the counsel, the non-service of the Malayalam
translation of those documents seriously prejudiced the detenu, as he
could not file an effective representation before the Advisory Board
and the Government.
5. 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
2025:KER:92587
Government and Advisory Board due to the non-service of certain
relied-upon document is absolutely baseless. According to the
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.
6. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced
and have perused the records.
7. From submissions made by the learned counsel for the
detenu, it is gatherable that his main grievance is that, out of the
documents relied on by the jurisdictional authority for passing Ext.P1
order, some documents are in the Kannada language, which the
detenu is not accustomed to. From a perusal of the documents, we
are also convinced that out of the documents relied upon by the
jurisdictional authority, some of them are in the Kannada language.
Even the respondents do not have a case that the detenu knows
Kannada. 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
2025:KER:92587
Board as well as the Government. Therefore, we also find 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.
8. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed and Ext.P1
order of detention is set aside. The Superintendent of Central Prison,
Kannur, is directed to release the detenu, Sri.Saifudeen @ Saifu @
Poocha Saifu , 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 Central Prison, Kannur, forthwith.
SD/-
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
SD/-
sab JOBIN SEBASTIAN
JUDGE
2025:KER:92587
APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) NO. 1575 OF 2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.DCKSGD/9193/2025/D1 (1) DATED
06.10.2025 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
30.10.2025 FILED UNDER RIGHT TO
INFORMATION ACT, 2005 BY THE COUNSEL
FOR THE DETENU
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NO
DCKSGD/10886/2025-D1 DATED 04.11.2025
RECEIVED UNDER RTI ACT PURSUANT TO
EXHIBIT P2 APPLICATION.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 30.10.2025 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT
EVIDENCING THE EXT P4
