The High Court of Karnataka has upheld the detention of a person from Kolar under the Goonda Act observing that he is involved in as many as 45 criminal cases.
A division bench comprising Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar said that though he is acquitted in two cases, they were not an honourable acquittal.
The detention of Sharath alias Sharath Kumar from Andersonpet in Kolar was challenged by his wife by filing a habeas corpus petition. It was claimed that her husband has been kept under illegal custody.
On April 4, 2024, the Deputy Commissioner of Kolar had passed the order to keep Sharath under detention for one year, by exercising power under the provisions of Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas (Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video or Audio Pirates) Act, (the Goonda Act). On May 3, 2024, the state government had confirmed this order.
'Translated to Tamil'
It was contended that though Sharath can speak Kannada, the papers must have been translated in his mother tongue Tamil.
It was further claimed that though he was granted bail in many cases and also had not violated any of the conditions imposed by the courts, the detention was unwarranted. It was claimed that there is no contiguity/proximity between the alleged offences and the grounds projected in support of the detention order.
On the other hand, State Public Prosecutor B A Belliappa, the detenue knows all the three languages - Tamil, Kannada and English – and that the copies of all the documents that were fully legible were furnished and that he has understood the same.
The division bench noted that it is not the case of the petitioner that acquittal in a murder case was an honorable acquittal.
“There was one case of kidnapping/abduction filed by none other than his first wife V Bhanupriya and the detenue has been acquitted. Here again, it is not a case of honorable acquittal. There are two attempted murder cases, one robbery case, 32 theft cases, one case of attack on a public servant and 4 cases of hurt. All of them are spread over between 2008 and 2024,” the bench said.
The bench also said that it is the primary duty of the state as the guardian to protect the lives and liberties of the subjects.
'Fear of law diminishing'
“The fear of law is diminishing; sensible sections of society live in anxiety and insecurity. Higher level of vigilance by the administration has become inevitable. As of necessity, a larger leverage has to be conceded to ensure peace and tranquility in the society. Measures like preventive detention are aimed at this. The criminal antecedents of detenues galore on record and they lend credence to the contention of state public prosecutor that his detention is inevitably ordered after exploring all alternatives,” the court said.