Read Time: 06 minutes
SC bench noted these were solitary instances of allegations of extortion and rape and there was no material before the detaining authority to indicate that the detenu was in the habit of committing the same offence yet again
The Supreme Court has said that mere involvement in a sexual offence, including one related to gang rape, by itself will not be sufficient to invoke stringent provision for preventive detention.
A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Aravind Kumar thus quashed detention order passed by the Collector on June 30, 2023 and confirmed by Telangana state authorities on August 9, 2023 with regard to Bandi Narayana, brother of appellant Vaddi Lakshmi as it was not explained how involvement in solitary instance of the accused would be prejudicial to maintenance of public order.
The court held that the order passed under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, 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, was not justified here.
Having considered the matter in detail, the bench said, "We are of the opinion that invocation of Section 3 of the 1986 Act is not justified as mere involvement in a sexual offence, including one under Section 376D of the IPC, by itself will not be sufficient to invoke Section 3 of the 1986 Act."
Apart from the fact that there was no justification for invoking the provisions of the 1986 Act, the court also noted that they were solitary instances. In fact, the bench pointed out, the allegation of rape made on May 01, 2023 was only in addition to the earlier allegation of extortion of April 27, 2023.
"These are solitary instances of allegations of extortion and rape. There is no material before the detaining authority to indicate that the detenu is in the habit of committing the same offence yet again. In the absence of any material of this nature, there is absolutely no justification for the order of June 30, 2023," the bench said.
The court, therefore, held the order of detention, coupled with its confirmation, as not sustainable.
In the case, a complaint was filed on April 27, 2023 for extortion under Section 384 of the IPC, which was followed by a subsequent complaint for commission of an offence under Sections 394, 376D and 411 read with 34 of the IPC on May 01, 2023.
However, the detenu was released on August 17, 2023 as the court directed that he was entitled for default bail.
The detention order was passed on the ground that he, along with his associates, was allegedly involved in committing rape upon a public servant and robbing her of valuables including Apple Phone, so there is an imminent possibility of him again committing similar offences which would be detrimental to public order and would create fear and a feeling of insecurity in the minds of the women folk.
Case Title: Vaddi Lakshmi vs. State of Telangana & Ors
Please Login or Register
