desk
Share
News Topical, Digital Desk : The Supreme Court said that preventive detention is an extraordinary power given to the state, which should be exercised with restraint. The court also quashed the order of the District Magistrate to detain a moneylender who was allegedly involved in illegal activities again after getting bail in four cases.
had violated the conditions of bail
A bench of Supreme Court judges Sanjay Karol and Manmohan questioned the argument of the detaining authority that the order was passed because the detenu had violated the bail conditions in these cases. The bench said that instead the authority should have filed a petition in the competent court to cancel the bail.
Kerala High Court had canceled the decision
In its order pronounced on Friday, the Supreme Court said, "Therefore, the detention order dated June 20, 2024 and the impugned judgment dated September 4, 2024 passed by the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam are set aside. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal is allowed."
Should not be used under normal circumstances-SC
The bench noted that the power of preventive detention is recognised in the Constitution under Article 22(3)(b). "The provision of preventive detention is an extraordinary power in the hands of the state, which must be used sparingly. This provision limits the liberty of a person on the ground of apprehension of future commission of an offence, and hence should not be used under normal circumstances," the Supreme Court said.
The court rejected the argument
The bench rejected the contention of the detention order issuing authority that the detenu, Rajesh, who ran a private financial company called 'Ritika Finance', was violating the bail conditions imposed on him in the cases which were considered for passing the detention order.
The order of preventive detention was confirmed
Relevantly, in none of the four cases, any application has been filed alleging breach of such conditions by the respondent, the court said. Moreover, these have also not been mentioned during the hearing of the case filed by his wife against the order of the Kerala High Court, wherein the order of preventive detention was confirmed by the District Collector of Palakkad, the bench said.
The order cannot be sustained- Court
The Supreme Court said, 'Keeping in mind the above interpretations of the law, we have no doubt that the detention order cannot be sustained. The circumstances stated in the order by the detaining authority may be sufficient grounds for the State to approach the competent courts for cancellation of bail, but it cannot be said that it justifies his preventive detention.'
The maximum period of detention had expired
The bench said, 'We clarify that if such an application is made by the respondent state to cancel the bail of the prisoner, it should be decided without being influenced by the above comments.' The Supreme Court had ordered the release of the prisoner on December 10, 2024 as the maximum period of his detention under the Act had expired.
--Advertisement--
