Supreme Court Sets Aside Preventive Detention Of Kerala Man Detained Under Goonda Act

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Manmohan ruled that the detention was legally unsustainable and held that mere bail in criminal cases cannot be grounds for invoking such an extraordinary measure.

The appeal, arising out of a judgment passed by the Kerala High Court on September 4, 2024, had challenged the detention of one Rajesh, the husband of the appellant, under Section 3 of the Act, based on four criminal cases primarily relating to money lending and alleged public disorder.

The District Magistrate, Palakkad, had passed the order on June 20, 2024, branding him a "notorious goonda."

However, the Bench observed that the cases cited by the authorities did not meet the threshold of disturbing public order as envisaged under the law, and at best, pertained to law and order.

The Court drew a clear distinction between both terms, emphasizing that preventive detention is not justified where the impact of alleged criminal acts is limited to individuals and not society at large.

Quoting precedents such as Rekha v. State of Tamil Nadu, Icchhu Devi v. Union of India, and Ameena Begum v. State of Telangana, the Court reiterated that preventive detention laws are exceptional and must be narrowly construed to avoid infringing on personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

It also took note of the fact that the detenu was on bail in all the relevant cases and had complied with bail conditions. Importantly, the State had not moved to cancel the bail in any of the pending matters, a fact the Court found critical in assessing the necessity and legality of invoking preventive detention.

“The law of preventive detention is a hard law and therefore it should be strictly construed. Care should be taken that the liberty of a person is not jeopardised unless his case falls squarely within the four corners of the relevant law,” the Court observed, quoting from Vijay Narain Singh v. State of Bihar.

The Apex Court concluded that the circumstances cited could not justify curtailing Rajesh's liberty through preventive detention and that the State’s proper recourse would have been to seek cancellation of bail through regular judicial channels.

Accordingly, the Court quashed the detention order dated June 20, 2024, and the Kerala High Court’s judgment upholding it. The appeal was allowed, and all pending applications were disposed of.