IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELVETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.14839 of 2008 Between: P.Mallikarjuna, S/o. Kodanda Rami Reddy, R/o. Vatttambedu Village, Tada (M), Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Collector & District Magistrate, Sri. Potti Sriramulu Nellore District. 3 The Superintendent, Central Jail, Cherlapally, R.R.District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or Habeas Corpus under Article 226 of the Constituion of India directing the respondents to produce to produce Sri. Attrambakkam Ayyappa @ Ayyappa Reddy, S/o. Subbaramireddy, now detained in central Prison, Cherrlapally before this Hon'ble Court and he may be ordered to be released forthwith after declaring that this detention is illegal and void and pass Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.C.PRAVEEN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents : THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.14839 of 2008 ORAL ORDER : (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) Heard Sri C.Padmanabha Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri C. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondents. 2. The present Writ of Habeas Corpus is filed by the nephew of the alleged detenu seeking a direction to the respondents to produce the alleged detenu viz., Sri Attrambakkam Ayyappa @ Ayyappa Reddy, son of Subbaramireddy, who is now detained in Central Prison, Cherlapally, before this Court and release him forthwith. 3. The alleged detenu was allegedly involved in doing clandestine business of transporting rice across the inter State Border of Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu States. Taking into account of his frequent involvement in the said activity, by order, dated 21-06-2008, in Rc.No.B/596/08, the alleged detenu was directed to be detained by the competent authority i.e., the Collector & District Magistrate, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District, Nellore, the second respondent herein, exercising the jurisdiction conferred under Section 3 (2) (a) read with Section 3 (1) of Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (for brevity “the Act”), and the same had been approved by the Advisory Board as well as the Government. 4. No counter affidavit is filed by the respondents. 5. However, Sri C.Padmanabha Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, points out that there is an apparent error on the face of the record which would vitiate the order of detention passed by the competent authority. In this regard, he points out that the order of detention, dated 21-06-2008, refers to as many as seven offences said to have been committed by the alleged detenu under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 6. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the order of detention, dated 21- 06-2008, shows that the first two items referred to by the detaining authority i.e., (1) Crime No.121 of 1992 said to have been committed by the alleged detenu under Sections 354 and 509 of Indian Penal Code of Tada Police Station, and (2) P.R.No.287/94-95 said to have been committed by the alleged detenu under Section 34 (a) of the A.P. Excise Act of Nellore Prohibition and Excise Police Station, are totally irrelevant for passing the order of detention and the same should get vitiated as held by the apex Court in MOHD. YOUSUF vs. STATE OF J. & K.. 7. From a bare perusal of the preamble of the order of detention, dated 21-06- 2008, it is obvious that the order of detention was passed for violations of the Laws of Essential Commodities Act. In such an event, the violations, which are punishable under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act alone have to be referred to in the order of detention, if the authority is satisfied. 8. It is on record that the above referred two offences are not under the Essential Commodities Act. Out of the above two offences, one is under the Indian Penal Code and the other is under the A.P. Excise Act. Therefore, both the offences are not relevant and alien to the object of passing the order of detention. 9. It is further pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel that the detaining authority had the knowledge that under item No.1, the alleged detenu was acquitted. Therefore, having the knowledge that the alleged detenu was acquitted of the said offence, referring to the said offence in the order of detention, dated 21-06-2008, shows that there was no application of mind and any order passed without application of mind is held to be irregular and the same is liable to be set aside. 10. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the above lapses pointed out on the part of the competent authority would vitiate the order of detention and hence the order of detention, dated 21-06-2008, and all other consequential proceedings passed against the alleged detenu are liable to the set aside. 11. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, at the stage of admission, setting aside the detention order, dated 21-06-2008, in proceedings Rc.No.B/596/08 passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, Sri Potti Sree Ramulu Nellore District, Nellore, and all other consequential proceedings passed against the alleged detenu, viz., Sri Attrambakkam Ayyappa @ Ayyappa Reddy, s/o. Subbaramireddy, aged 33 years, Vannekapu Alia Palle Reddy, resident of Vatambedu village, Kapu Street, Sullurpeta of SPSR Nellore District, under Section 3 (2) (a) read with Section 3 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas and Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986, and the alleged detenu shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 12-08-2008. Msr. NOTE:- Now, it is brought to the notice of this Court that due to inadvertence, in the advance order of the writ petition, it was typed as “Section 3 (2) (a) read with Section 3 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas and Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986, instead of typing “Section 3 (2) (a) read with Section 3 (1) of Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980”. Therefore, in the detailed order of the writ petition, Office is directed to substitute the words “Section 3 (2) (a) read with Section 3 (1) of Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980”, in the place of “Section 3 (2) (a) read with Section 3 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas and Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986.” _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 12-08-2008. Msr. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Chief Secretary to Government, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Collector & District Magistrate, Sri Potti Sriramulu Nellore District. 3 The Superintendent, Central Jail, Cherlapally, R.R.District. 4. Two CCs to Advocate General, Government of Andhra Pradesh, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 5. Two C.D. copies. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.14839 of 2008 12-08-2008 (Msr)