Cannot Sit As Appellate Court On Subjective Satisfaction Of Detaining Authority: Karnataka High Court Rejects Plea Challenging Detention Order

The Karnataka High Court said that it cannot sit as an Appellate Court on the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority.

The Court dismissed the Habeas Corpus Writ Petition filed by the mother of detenue aged about 25 years, challenging the Order of detention passed by the State authorities and seeking to quash the same.

A Division Bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice K. Manmadha Rao observed, “In view of the foregoing discussion, we do not find any reasons to hold that the order of the Government-detention authority is illegal or contrary to law. We cannot sit as an Appellate Court on the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority, which is not permissible in law as held in above referred Judgments.”

Advocate V. Lakshmi Kantha Rao appeared for the Petitioner while HCGP Thejas P. appeared for the Respondents.

Factual Background

The detenue being a habitual offender was involved in serious criminal cases such as attempted murder, extortion, assault, kidnapping, threat to life, racketeering, rape, child sexual abuse, sale of drugs since 2016 by forming a group of criminal associates and engaging in illegal activities, violating bail conditions after being released on bail. Being a nuisance to law and order, despite being prosecuted in the criminal cases in which he was involved, he continued to engage in illegal activities, made a habit of committing criminal acts, and continued to commit criminal acts repeatedly. An Order of arrest was issued in January this year in respect of nine cases registered against him.

The Respondents found that presence of the detenue was causing disturbances to public order and tranquility and was becoming menace to the society. Therefore, he was detained based on the detention order passed by the Commissioner of Police. Thereafter, he submitted a representation to the Government for reviewing the detention order. The said representation was rejected by the Government and after obtaining opinion from the Advisory Board and following the procedures under the Goondas Act, it confirmed the detention order. It ordered to detain him for a period of one year. This was under challenge before the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel, noted, “Section 12 of the Act, 1986 provides that where the Advisory Board in its report is of the opinion that sufficient cause exists warranting detention, the Government may confirm the detention i.e., it gives the appropriate Government the discretion to either confirm or revoke the order of detention. But where the Advisory Board in its report is of the pinion that no sufficient cause exists for the detention of the detenue, the same is binding on the Government, and the detenue is forthwith required to be released.”

The Court further said that on receipt of the opinion under Section 12 of the Act, the State Government has confirmed the detention order and continue the detention of the person on such period, not exceeding the maximum period of specified under Section 13 of the Act.

“Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the detaining authority considered the materials placed before them and after subjective satisfaction of the same passed the detention order”, it added.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition.

Cause Title- Roopa v. State of Karnataka & Ors. (Case Number: WRIT PETITION (HABEAS CORPUS) No.37 OF 2025)

Click here to read/download the Judgment