AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
17 paragraphs · 348 wordsA.Muhamed Mustaque, J
The petitioner is 25 years old approached this Court challenging an externment order. He is involved in four crimes. Three crimes have been
registered by Kurathicad Police station and other by Mannar Police Station. He already suffered two and half months of externment order. The last
prejudicial activity was on 9.12.2023. The externment order was passed on 16.04.2024. The petitioner has been restrained from entering in Alappuzha
District.
The learned counsel for the petitioner assailed this order on the ground that there is a delay in passing the order and also on the ground that the
nature of allegations against the petitioner in crime, would really establish that that there are no grounds to invoke the provisions of Kerala Anti-Social
Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007. It is true that there is a delay involved in this matter. But we need to note unlike a detention order, the externment
order will have to be viewed from the different parameters. If the authorities are of the view that repetition of the offence can be prevented if he is
entering from a particular jurisdiction, such an order can be passed belatedly after taking note of the pattern of crime committed by such person.
In this matter three crimes have been registered within one police station and other crime have also committed within the same district. Therefore,
we do not want to interfere with the externment order. However we find that petitioner is only 25 years old and he has aged parents. We also note
that he has been granted bail by the Magistrate Court concerned. Taken note of over all circumstances, we are of the view that operation of the
impugned order can be confined to till today. Hereafter, the petitioner shall report before the Station house Officer, Kurathicad police station on every
sunday at 11 a.m, for a period of three months.
If there is any violation in the condition as above, the official respondents are free to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law.
This W.P.(Crl.) is disposed of as above.