Karnataka High Court quashes Goondas Act detention order; imposes 25k costs on State, Police

The Karnataka High Court recently upheld the right to personal liberty of a detenu and imposed ₹25,000 as costs on the State government and the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru [Karthik v. Commissioner of Police and ors]..Noting that the detenu has been in detention since December 14 last year, the Bench of Acting Chief Justice Satish Chanda Sharma and Justice SS Magadum directed that the amount be paid to the detenu within 30 days. "As we are dealing with a case of personal liberty and the petitioner is in detention since 14.12.2020, this Court is of the opinion that the petition deserves to be allowed with cost of Rs.25,000/-. The petition is allowed with the cost of Rs.25,000/-. Though Rs.25,000/- is a meager amount, as it is a case of violation of personal liberty, however, keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the cost is confined to Rs.25,000/- and the same be paid to the petitioner-detenue within a period of 30 days from today.".The Court was hearing a plea by one Karthik challenging three orders of detention under the Karnataka Goondas Act, 1985 issued by the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru, which was re-affirmed by the State government. .The petitioner's grievance was that though he had submitted a representation dated January 12, 2021, the same was neither looked into by the Advisory Board (under the Act) nor by the State government at any point of time. .However, while filing an additional statement of objections, a police inspector stated that no details of the representation have been furnished by the petitioner. Terming this development as being strange, the Court said, "It is really strange that the State Government after filing of copy of the representation along with the statement of objections, in the additional statement of objections, has stated that no details of representations have been furnished by the petitioner. Again, in the additional statement of objections, it is nowhere stated that the representation was considered by the Advisory Board or the State Government.".After looking into the Act and judicial decisions, the Court proceeded to quash the detention orders, noting,"In the light of the aforesaid judgment, as the representation was not considered either by the Advisory Board or by the State Government and as we are dealing with the right of personal liberty, the order of detention deserves to be quashed.".The Court also pulled up the Commissioner of Police as well as the State government for filing affidavits in a casual manner.While setting aside the detention order, the Court clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on merits in respect of the other grounds raised by the petitioner..[Read Judgement]