The Kerala High Court on Tuesday set aside the detention order issued by the Thiruvananthapuram Collector against councillor R. Sugathan under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act (KAAPA Act), 2007.
A Division Bench of Justices Anil K. Narendran and S. Murali Krishna set aside the detention order and directed the Superintendent of Central Prison and Correctional Home, Viyyur, to release Mr. Sugathan if he was not required in any other case.
The court held that his detention order lacked application of mind and that he had been served with several illegible pages in the documents pertaining to his arrest. The unexplained delay in considering his representation seeking cancellation of the order or his temporary release violated his constitutional rights against arbitrary arrest and detention.
The Collector had considered seven criminal cases registered at the Vattiyurkavu police station for ordering Mr. Sugathan’s preventive detention, classifying him as a ‘known rowdy.’ The court noted that final reports had been filed in six of the seven cases, and investigation was under way in the seventh one. The court had allowed anticipatory bail in one of the cases and had directed Mr. Sugathan to appear before the investigating officer within one week. Mr. Sugathan had sought an extension of time to surrender thereafter, which had been granted.
Mr. Sugathan informed the court that he had filed representations to the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) and the Chief Secretary against the detention order. He stated that there was delay on the government’s part since they allegedly waited till the receipt of the opinion of the advisory board, established under the KAAPA Act.
He contended that the authorities concerned failed to consider the sufficiency of bail conditions imposed in one of the cases, which prevented him from committing similar crimes. He claimed that the preventive detention proceedings were initiated due to “political malafides” as he was a councillor of the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation.
Director General of Prosecution T. Asaf Ali argued that Mr. Sugathan had been on the rowdy list since 2014. Altogether, there were 22 criminal cases registered against him. He argued that the councillor refused to receive the arrest intimation and service of documents, and he attacked the police personnel who went to arrest him, along with his co-accused. He also contended that even if some of the documents or pages were illegible, it would not vitiate the detention order.
Published – October 06, 2026 09:34 pm IST
