ORDER : 1. This writ petition is filed praying to grant the following relief: “.......to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS under Article 226 of Constitution of India declaring G.O.Rt. No. 2449 dated 06.11.2021 of the respondents detaining the petitioner’s husband, namely, Kakinatla Manikanta S/o Suryanarayana, as illegal, unconstitutional and violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution of India and pass....” 2. Heard Sri. A. Jagan, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondents. 3. The petitioner-wife of the detenu filed this writ petition challenging the order of detention dated 26-9-2021, in exercise of Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers, Spurious Seed Offenders, Insecticide Offenders, Fertilizer Offenders, Food Adulteration Offenders, Fake Document Offenders, Scheduled Commodities Offenders, Forest Offenders, Gaming Offenders, Sexual Offenders, Explosive Substances Offenders, Arms Offenders, Cyber Crime Offenders and White Collar or Financial Offenders Act, 1986 (for short ‘Act 1 of 1986’). 4. The order of detention refers to two offences vide (1) Crime No. 54 of 2021 for the offences under Sections 341, 307 read with 34 IPC of Godavarikhani-I Town Police Station and (2) 290 of 2021 for the offence under Section 392 IPC of Godavarikhani-I Town Police Station. Apart from the same, it states that the petitioner was earlier involved in 5 bodily offences and went to jail and he was a goonda as defined in clause (g) of Section 2 of Act 1 of 1986. 5. It was alleged that though the detenu went to jail earlier in the above 5 cases, he did not change his attitude, continued to indulge in criminal activities and a rowdy sheet was opened against him, he did not mend his behavior. Holding that his activities were adversely affecting the public order leaving large sections of people under the grip of fear and shock, causing a feeling of insecurity, the detention orders were passed by the Commissioner of Police, Ramagundam. The advisory board tendered its opinion that there was sufficient cause for detention of detenu. The Government confirmed the order of detention by issuing G.O.Rt. No. 2449, General Administration (Spl. Law and Order) Department, dated 6-11-2021. 6. The advisory board tendered its opinion that there was sufficient cause for detention of detenu. The Government confirmed the order of detention by issuing G.O.Rt. No. 2449, General Administration (Spl. Law and Order) Department, dated 6-11-2021. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned detention order was passed without any basis and without any application of mind, that the alleged offences were under trial, the detaining authority had not considered that bails were granted by the concerned criminal courts, that the alleged offences would not constitute any public disorder. The police had falsely implicated the detenu in the criminal cases as they were unable to arrest the real culprits and prayed to allow the petition by setting aside the detention order. 7. The learned Government Pleader for Home submitted that the detenu was involved in 2 offences, basing on which the detention order was passed against him. He confessed to have committed the above offences. The investigation done also would clearly establish that the detenu was involved in these offences. The petitioner was indulging in bodily offences and was creating large scale fear among the general public and prayed to dismiss the petition. 8. The issue for consideration is whether in the above facts, the preventive detention of the detenu is valid? 9. On a perusal of detention order, two crimes were taken as basis for detaining the detenu. Crime No. 54 of 2021 is registered by police of Godavarikhani-I Town Police Station, Peddapalli District basing on the complaint given by one Bangari Srinivas. The complainant alleged that the detenu had taken hand loan from him and failed to repay the same. In that issue a quarrel took place between them and the detenu threatened him by saying that he along with his associates would kill him shortly. On 7-2-2021, when the complainant attended a function in the locality and while leaving, the detenu and his associate restrained him and his associate picked up a knife and tried to stab him on his chest and when one Prabhudas tried to rescue him, his associate stabbed Prabhubas on his stomach and caused severe bleeding injury. When the locality people gathered, they fled away. 10. When the locality people gathered, they fled away. 10. This incident would disclose that it was between two known persons due to a financial dispute and it was not even the petitioner who tried to stab the complainant, but his associate who stabbed the person who tried to rescue the complainant. The injury sustained by the injured was also small abrasion over the left side of the abdomen, which is a simple in nature. 11. The other case in Crime No. 290 of 2021 is registered by police of Godavarikhani-I Town Police station, Peddapalli District and as per the complaint, on 27-5-2021 while the complainant was proceeding in a lorry with a load of coal to Godavarikhani, on the night of 28-5-2021 at about 1:15 hours, 4 persons came on a Bajaj CT 100, blue and black color motorcycle TS-2-EJ-0742 obstructed his lorry, one person got into the cabin, pushed him down from steering, resulting which he fell down. One person bet him with hands by showing a knife, asked him to give money and robbed his purse from his pant pocket and all of them fled away on the same motor cycle. He stated that his purse was containing Rs. 9000/- net cash, SBI ATM card and copy of his Driving License. 12. The above complaint was filed against 4 unknown persons. The detenu was shown as A1 in the charge sheet. It was stated in the charge sheet that police apprehended the detenu basing on the motorcycle number which was in the name of the father of the detenu and recovered the purse containing Rs. 2,500/- SBI ATM Card and copy of Driving License of the complainant from A1. 13. Both the above crimes would disclose that they were ordinary law and order crimes which could be prosecuted in the normal course by the criminal courts and which do not warrant the extraordinary measure of preventively detaining the detenu. By involving in these two crimes, it cannot be said that the detenu had created a panic situation and fear in the mind of the public, endangering their safety and security affecting the public order. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the order of detention is not sustainable. 14. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. By involving in these two crimes, it cannot be said that the detenu had created a panic situation and fear in the mind of the public, endangering their safety and security affecting the public order. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the order of detention is not sustainable. 14. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned detention order passed by the Office of the Commissioner of Police, Ramagundam-2nd respondent vide C. No. 59/PDCELL/CCRB/RGM/2021 dated 26-9-2021 and the consequential confirmation order of the Principal Secretary, General Administration (Spl. Law and Order) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad-1st respondent confirming the detention vide G.O.Rt. No. 2449, General Administration (Spl. Law and Order) Department dated 06.11.2021, are hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to set the detenu, namely Kakinatla Manikanta S/o Suryanarayana, Age: 25 years Caste: Relli (SC) R/o H. No. 8-1-323, Hanumannagar, Godavarikhani, Peddapalli District, Aadhar No. 258058216628 at liberty forthwith, if he is no longer required in any other criminal case. 15. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.