Bengaluru: Merely stating that a person’s activities are prejudicial to public order, without supporting material, is not sufficient to justify preventive detention under the Goonda Act, the Karnataka High Court has held while ordering the release of a man from Bagalkot district.A division bench of Justices M Nagaprasanna and Hema Kulkarni allowed a habeas corpus petition filed by Kavitha, wife of Sanju Vitthal Kadkol, a resident of Jamakhandi. Kadkol was detained under the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum Grabbers, and Video or Audio Pirates Act, 1985.The detention order was passed on July 6 and subsequently confirmed, including by the advisory board. Challenging his continued detention, Kavitha contended that her husband was being held illegally.Opposing the petition, the govt advocate submitted that Kadkol was a habitual offender who repeatedly indulged in the illegal use of weapons and faced charges under the Arms Act, 1959. The court was also told that copies of the documents relied upon by the authorities had been furnished to him and that the advisory board had rejected his plea for release.However, examining the records, the bench noted that Kadkol had been acquitted in one of the four criminal cases against him and was out on bail in the other three, where trials were pending.Citing several Supreme Court judgments, the bench observed that preventive detention could not be used as a substitute for seeking cancellation of bail. It also reiterated the distinction between a threat to public order and a mere breach of law and order, noting that preventive detention requires the former.The state had cited Kadkol’s inclusion in the rowdy sheet, his history and alleged gang activities, illegal sources of income, the fear he had allegedly created among the public and intimidation of witnesses.The bench, however, pointed out that the state had neither sought cancellation of bail in the pending cases nor challenged the acquittal. It also noted that no non-bailable warrant had been issued against Kadkol for violating bail conditions or failing to attend court proceedings.Holding that the material on record did not justify preventive detention, the bench allowed the petition and ordered Kadkol’s release.
