Telangana High Court
Ashiya Banu vs The State Of Telangana on 10 March, 2023
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili, Pulla Karthik
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK
+ WRIT PETITION No.45999 OF 2022
% Date: 10.03.2023
Between
# Ashiya Banu
... Petitioner
AND
$ The State of Telangana,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
General Administration
(Spl. (Law & Order) Department,
Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
... Respondents
! Counsel for the petitioner : Ms. R. Sowmya Reddy
^ Counsel for the Respondents : Sri S. Mujib Kumar,
Special Government Pleader
for Addl. Advocate General
< GIST :
> HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred
C/15
2 AKS,J & PK,J
W.P.No.45999 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
*****
WRIT PETITION No.45999 OF 2022
#Between:
Ashiya Banu
...Petitioner
AND
The State of Telangana,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
General Administration
(Spl. (Law & Order) Department,
Secretariat, Hyderabad and others
... Respondents
!Counsel for the petitioner : Ms. R. Sowmya Reddy
Counsel for the Respondents : Sri S. Mujib Kumar,
Special Government Pleader
for Addl. Advocate General
DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 10.03.2023
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK
1 Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No
may be allowed to see the Judgments?
2 Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No
marked to Law Reports/Journals
3 Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to Yes/No
see the fair copy of the Judgment?
3 AKS,J & PK,J
W.P.No.45999 of 2022
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK
WRIT PETITION No.45999 OF 2022
ORDER: (per AKS,J)
Smt. Ashiya Banu, the petitioner, has filed this Habeas
Corpus petition on behalf of her husband, Mohammed Afsar @
Sahil, S/o. late Mohammed Afzal, the detenu, challenging the
detention order vide No:59/PD-CELL/CYB/2022, dated
17.12.2022, passed by the respondent No.2-Commissioner of
Police, Cyberabad Commissionerate, whereby, the detenu was
detained under Section 3(2) of the Telangana Prevention of
Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders,
Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Land-Grabbers, Spurious
Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertilizer Offenders, Food
Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document offenders, Scheduled
Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders,
Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms
Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial
Offenders Act, 1986 (for short, 'Act 1 of 1986'), and the
consequential confirmation order vide G.O.Rt.No.246, General
4 AKS,J & PK,J
W.P.No.45999 of 2022
Administration (Spl. (Law & Order)) Department, dated
17.02.2023, passed by the Secretary to Government, General
Administration (Spl. (Law & Order)) Department, Government of
Telangana.
2. Heard Ms. R. Sowmya Reddy, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri S. Mujib Kumar, learned Special Government
Pleader, representing the learned Additional Advocate General
appearing for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner had contended that the
detenu was detained vide the impugned detention order, dated
17.12.2022, by invoking the provisions under the Act 1 of 1986
for the alleged crime registered against him i.e., Crime No.1375
of 2022 of Gachibowli Police Station, registered for the offences
under Sections 370 and 370(A)(2) I.P.C. and Sections 3, 4, 5
and 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. The detenu
was arrested in connection with the said crime on 02.12.2022
and still he is in judicial remand and the detaining authority,
without application of mind, has mechanically passed the
impugned detention order, dated 17.12.2022, alleging that the
detenu is causing disturbance and harm to the general public.
5 AKS,J & PK,J
W.P.No.45999 of 2022
The respondents must consider the relevant facts and then only,
they can invoke the provisions under the Act 1 of 1986 against
the detenu, provided the detenu is disturbing the public peace
and order as on the date of passing of the impugned detention
order. As admittedly, the detenu was in judicial remand as on
the date of passing of the impugned detention order i.e., on
17.12.2022, the question of detenu disturbing the peace and
affecting the general public would not arise. Therefore, the
impugned orders are passed without application of mind.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that
the issue whether the provisions under the Act 1 of 1986 can be
invoked based upon a solitary crime or not, was considered by a
Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.30726 of 2022, dated
23.09.2022, wherein this Court has held that the provisions
under the Act 1 of 1986 cannot be invoked based upon a solitary
crime. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ
Petition by setting aside the impugned orders.
5. On the other hand, the learned Special Government
Pleader appearing for the respondents had contended that the
detenu is an immoral traffic offender and he was involved in a
6 AKS,J & PK,J
W.P.No.45999 of 2022
serious crime, which was affecting the general public, more
particularly, the young women. Therefore, the detaining
authority was justified in passing the impugned detention order.
There are no merits in the Writ Petition and the same is liable to
be dismissed.
6. Learned Special Government Pleader further contended
that the detenu was involved in identical crimes in the years
2011 and 2016, which would mean that there was history of
criminal record against him. Further, the bail application moved
by the detenu in the solitary crime relied on by the detaining
authority was coming up for orders and as there is every
possibility for the detenu to be released on bail and that after
release, he may involve in identical crimes once again, the
detaining authority has invoked the provisions under the Act 1 of
1986 against the detenu, in order to protect the general public.
Therefore, on these grounds also, the Writ Petition is liable to be
dismissed.
7. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made
by the learned counsel for the parties, is of the view that the
detaining authority has invoked the provisions under the Act 1 of
7 AKS,J & PK,J
W.P.No.45999 of 2022
1986 against the detenu based on a solitary crime registered
against him and the issue whether the provisions under the Act 1
of 1986 can be invoked based upon a solitary crime or not, was
considered by this Court in W.P.No.30726 of 2022, dated
23.09.2022, wherein this Court has held that the provisions
under the Act 1 of 1986 cannot be invoked based upon a solitary
crime. Therefore, following the aforesaid order, dated
23.09.2022, passed by this Court in W.P.No.30726 of 2022, the
impugned orders are liable to be set aside.
8. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned
detention order vide No:59/PD-CELL/CYB/2022, dated
17.12.2022, passed by the respondent No.2, and the
consequential confirmation order vide G.O.Rt.No.246, General
Administration (Spl. (Law & Order)) Department, dated
17.02.2023, passed by the Secretary to Government, General
Administration (Spl. (Law & Order)) Department, Government of
Telangana, are hereby set aside. However, it is made clear that
since the detenu is in judicial remand, this Court is not directing
for release of the detenu. There shall be no order as to costs.
8 AKS,J & PK,J
W.P.No.45999 of 2022
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition
shall stand closed.
___________________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
_________________
PULLA KARTHIK, J
Date: 10-03-2023.
Note: L.R. copy to be marked.
B/O.MD
Note:-
Issue C.C. in four days.
B/O.KVR
