IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2009 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 498 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SMT.SRUTHI, AGED 22 YEARS, W/O.SANTHOSH, KUNNUMMEL HOUSE, CHOORITHODE, BANDADUKA P.O., KASARGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHAIJAN C.GEORGE SRI.JOHN VIPIN SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI SMT.SAJITHA GEORGE SRI.P.A.SHIBU (PAZHAVAKAT) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AND ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, TRIVANDRUM. 3. T.P.PREMA RAJAN, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN CIRCLE, KASARAGOD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-12-2009 , THE COURT ON 14/12/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(Crl) No. 498 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 14th day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus apprehending that her husband Santhosh is likely to be taken into custody by the respondents. 2. The petitioner's husband Santhosh was earlier detained under the provisions of the Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007. By judgment dated 4th June, 2009 this Court set aside the order of detention. The husband of the petitioner was released from custody, as per the said judgment. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that her husband is again being taken into custody by the respondents. 4. Notice was given to the respondents. A statement has been filed by the Circle Inspector of Police, Kasaragod, in which it is reported that there is no intention whatsoever to take the petitioner's husband into custody in preventive detention. There are cases pending against him and his arrest is required in connection with those pending cases. Accordingly, he was arrested in two crimes i.e., Crime Nos. 838 and 842 of 2009 of Kasaragod W.P.(Cr) No. 498of 2009 2 Police Station. His arrest was effected on 24-11-2009 and he has been produced before the learned Magistrate. He has been remanded to custody and he continues in such judicial custody. 5. Learned Government Pleader submits that there are other cases also pending against him and his arrest shall be required in other cases also. The needful shall be done by the police to secure his custody in such other cases also, submits the learned Government Pleader. 6. The grievance of the petitioner that her husband is not to be detained in custody in exercise of the powers under the KAAPA. He is in judicial custody. It is for the husband of the petitioner to apply for bail, if he feels that he is entitled to such release on bail. At any rate, we find absolutely no justification to invoke the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of habeas corpus to secure the release of the petitioner's husband. The prayer is not justified at all. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while effecting arrest of the petitioner, the necessary safeguards have not been observed. That precisely is the surviving contention raised. If there be any omission to comply with the requisite safeguards of procedure, while effecting arrest of the petitioner's husband, the petitioner's husband can certainly raise that contention before the Magistrate who has remanded him to custody. We W.P.(Cr) No. 498of 2009 3 find no reason to assume that the learned Magistrate would not consider such grievance and pass appropriate orders on such prayers. 8. At any rate, we find absolutely no justification to invoke the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in favour of the petitioner or her husband who is admittedly in judicial custody now. a) This writ petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. mn.