Allowed

Meradakonda Manoj Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC29 Mar 2022WP/4395/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three writ petitions challenging detention orders under the Telangana Preventive Detention Act, 1986 were allowed. The Court held the impugned orders illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the Constitution as they were passed without adhering to statutory mandates and relied on crimes not disturbing public order. The petitioner and confirmation orders were set aside, and detenus were released.

What did the court decide?

The impugned detention orders and consequential confirmation orders were set aside. The detenus are directed to be set at liberty forthwith.

Meradakonda Manoj Kumar Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE^{TWENTY NINTH DAY OF IVARCH} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY TWO}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON,BLE^{DT. JUSTICESHAMEEMAKTHER} AND THE HON'BLE SMT^{JUSTICE JUWADISRIDEVI} WRIT P ETITION^{NO: 4395 . 4433 AND44380F2022}

¶5

wP NO.4395 0F 2022:

¶6

Betwee n:

¶7

Ir/eradakonda^{ltila noj Kumar. S/o. Merakonda Sudhakar, aged 24 years' occ'} iil 5;;i;; FvJ.^{H.fuo. 1-8/i , Jvothi nagar.Teegalpahad'Mancherial District'} Telangana State. ...pETt,oNER

¶8

...pETt,oNER

¶9

AND

¶10

I The State of Telangana.^{Rep. by its PrincipalSecretarv General} A.lministration^{(spl. (Law} riio oiolli^{D;p;t1,;;i-secietariat, Hyderabad}

¶11

2 r;; e;; ;i;.ld";i,liF"^{t ic" a nd Add I D istricttMagistrate( Executive)'} Ramaqundam Police^{Commissione rate'}

¶12

3 il;5;;;;;i;;oZnt,^{Cu"ilrlFiiioncherlapallv.l'4edchal}

¶13

"l13,.l'J3i'"t1ft!.

¶14

Petition under Article^{226 of lhe constitutionof lndiapraying that in the} circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighcourtmaybe pleased to issue an appropriate^{writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in} thenatureofWritofHabeasCorpus,directing3rdRespondenttoproducethe detenue i.e. Meradikonda^{Ajay Kumar now detained in centralPrison cherlapally,} Ir/edchal^- Ir/alkajgiri^{District before this Hon'blecourt and set-asidethe impunged} detention order^{passed by the 2nd Respondent vide c.No. 52l PDCELL/ CCRB/} RGIV/ 2021 , dl^{2610812021and confirmationorder vide G.O.Rt.No.2425,daled} o311112021^{passedby the 1st Respondent as being illegal, arbitrary,improper'} unilateral, u^{nconstitutio na I and violativeof Article 21 and 22 of the Constitutionof} lndia and to forthwith^{release the Detenue}

¶15

Counsel for the^{Petitioner: SRI PASHAM TRIVIKRAMREDDY}

¶16

Counsel for Respondents:^{AGP FOR HOME FOR} THE ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶17

WP NO: 4433 OF 2022

¶18

Between:

¶19

Meradakontla Manoj^{Kumar,S/o, IvlerakondaSudhakar, aged 24 yeg!s.'} 999 i;"t'S"*ii,"- nt". ft.ilo.^{1-8/i,Jyothi nagar,Teegalpahad,N/ancherialDistrict.} Telangana lltate. ...pETt,oNER

¶20

AND

¶21

1 The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its PrincipalSecretary'General} norinliiiai on^{(Sp[ (Lawarid Oroer;Department, Secretarrat, Hyderabad'}

¶22

2 fne Commiisi<jnijr of^{potice, and AcjdlDistrictl,4agistrate(Executive)} Ramaoundam Police^{Commissionerate.} rn" Sip"ii,.]t"ndent,^{Central Prison Cherlapallv,tr/edchal}

¶23

"113,.n1|.J3^1tt[ili.

¶24

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitutionof lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High court maybe} pleased to issue an appropriate writ,^{order or Direction, more particularly one in} the nature of writ of^{Habeas corpus, directing3rd Respondent to produce the} detenue i.e. Kummari^Kalyan @^{Bhai now detained in central Prisoncherlapally,} Medchal - Malkajgiri^{Districtbefore this Honourable court and set-aside the} impunged detention^{orderpassedby the 2nd Respondent videC No 4Bl} PDCELL/ CCRB/^RGt,l/2021 ,^{dt. 26to812021 and confirmationordervide} G.O.Rt.No. 2443, daled^{06t1112021passedby the'1 st Respondentas being} illegal, arbitrary, improper,^{unilateral,u nconstitutiona I and violativeof Article21} and 22 of the Cor-rstitution^{of lndia and to forthwith release the Detenue}

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI PASHAM TRIVIKRAMREDDY}

¶26

Counsel for Respondents:^{AGP FOR HOME FOR}

THE ADVOCATE GENERAL

WP NO: 4438 OF^'2022

Between:

Meradakonda Manoj Kumar,^{S/o. Merakonda Sudhakar, Aged 24 years, occ} Pvt Servic,:, FVo. H.No.^1-B/'l ,^{Jyothi Nagar,Teegalpahad,fi,4ancherialDistrict,} Telangana state

¶31

...PETrroNER

¶32

AND

¶33

The State of Telangana, Rep.^{by its PrincipalSecre^tary.General} AdministrzLtion^{(Sp[(LawariO OiOer; Department, Secretartat, Hyderabad}

¶34

The Comntissidn6r of Police^{and Addl District Magistrate (Executive),} Ramagundam Police Commissionerate.

¶35

rhe Superintendent,^{Central Prison Cherlapallv,Ivledchal-'"l1eE$3^1tJ!ft!.}

¶36

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitutionof lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiled therewith,the High courtmay be} pleased to issue an appropriate Writ,^{order or Direction, more particularly onein} the nature of writ^{of Habeas corpus, directing3rd Respondent to produce the} detenue i.e. Jadi Sagar^{nowdetained in central Prisoncherlapally,Medchal-} lvalkajgiri District before this^{Honourable courtand set-asidethe impunged} detention order^{passed by the 2nd Respondent vide c.No. 49/ PDCELL/CCRB/} RGIU/2021 , dl 26to812021^{and confirmationordervide G.o.Rt.No. 2444, dated} 06111t2021^{passed by the 1st Respondent as being illegal,arbitrary, improper,} unilateral, u nconstitutio^{na I and violative of Article 21 and 22 of the Constitutionof} lndia and to forthwith^{release the Detenue} Counsel for the^{Petitioner: SRI PASHAM TRIVIKRAMREDDY}

¶37

Counsel for Respondents:^{AGPFOR HOME FOR} THE ADVOCATE^GENERAL

¶38

The Court made the^following:

¶39

THE HON'BLE DT, JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER AND THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI

¶40

WRIT ETITION Nos.4395. 4433 AND 44 a oF 2022

¶41

COM MON ORDERI^(Per Hon'ble Dr, Justice^{ShameemAkther)}

¶42

The pe:titioner in these Writ Petitions and the issue involved are same and therefore, all the Writ Petitions are being taken^up together and disposed of by way of this common order.

¶43

Mr.M.t4anoj Kumar, S/o M.Sudhakar, the^petitioner in all these writ petitions filed the^present Habeas Corpus^petitions challenging the separate detention orders^vide C.No.s2lPDCELL/CCRB/RGM/ 202t, C.No.4BlPDCELL/CCRB/RGM/ 2021 and C No.49/PDCELL/CCRB/ RGM/202|, of even date, dated 26.08.202L, passed by the respondent No.2-Commissioner^of Police, Rarragundam Police Com missionerate, whereby,^the detenus werre detained under Section 3(2) of the^Telangana Preventive Detention Act, 1986 (Act 1 of 1986), and^the consequential confirmation orders vide G.O.Rt.Nos.2425,^{2443 and} 2444, daled 03,11.2021, 06.11.2021 and 06.11.2021 respectively, passed by respondent No.1-Principal Secretary to Government, General Administration (Spl.^(Law & Order))^Department, Governmenl. of Telangana.

¶44

.-zr

¶45

Dr.SA,J & JS,J W.P.Nos.4395 of 2022 & batch

¶46

¶47

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing the learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents in all the writ petitions and perused the record.

¶48

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the impugned detention orders were^passed by relying on three crimes registered against the detenus viz., Crime Nos.105, L44 and 145 of 2021 of Jaipur Police Station, Ramagundam Police Commissionerate. The detention order^passed against the coaccused in the said crimes was already set aside by this Courl vide order, dated 13.12.2021,^passed in W.P.No.26696 of 202L, and ultimately,^prayed to set aside the impugned detention orders and the consequential confirmation orders.

¶49

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home did not dispute the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶50

As seen from the materlal placed on record and the submissions made, it is clear that the detention order^passed against the co-accused in the aforesaid Crime Nos.105, 744 and 145 of 2021 of laipur Police Station, Ramagundam Police Cornirissionerate, was already set aside by this Court vlde order,

¶51

Dr SA,J &.JS,J W P.Nos.4395 of 2022 & batch

¶52

¶53

¶54

dated 13.121.2021, passed in W.P,No.26696 of 202L Moreover, the impugned detention order was passed without adhering to the requirements/mandate given under Section 3(2) of the Telangana Act 1 of 1986 and by relying on three crimes registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379 and 429 of iPC and Section 5 ol Prohibition of Telangana Cow Slaughter and Animal Prevention l\ct, 7977, which do not add up to disturbing the public order and it is only law and order problem. Under these circumstanc3s and since the facts and circumstances of the present case are akin to the facts and circumstances in W.P.No.26696 of 2027, the impugned orders are liable to be set a sid e.

¶55

In the result, all these three Writ Petitions are allowed. The impugned letention orders vide C.No.52lPDCELL/CCRB/RGM/ 202t, C.No.48lPDCELL/CCRB/RGM/202t and C.No.49lPDCELL/ CCRB/RGM/,2021 of even date, dated 26.08.2021, passed by the respondent No.2, and the consequential confirmation orders vide G.O.Rt.Nos.,Z425, 2443, and 2444, dated 03.11.202L, 06.7L.2021 and 06.11.:2021 respectively, passed by respondent No.1, are hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to set the detenus, namely Mer;:dikonda Ajay Kumar, S/o Sudhakar, Kummari Kalyan

¶56

Dr.SA,J & JS,J W.P.Nos.4395 of 2022 & barch

¶57

¶58

¶59

@ Bhai, S/o Kistaiah and Jadi Sagar, S/o Swamy, at liberty

¶60

forthwith, if they are no longer required in any other criminal case.

¶61

The Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in these Writ

¶62

Petitions shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.