Goonda Act | Preventive Detention Invalid If Based On Acts Committed As Juvenile: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court held last week [April 29] that a preventive detention order passed against a 19-year-old under the Karnataka Goonda Act, 1985 would stand vitiated since most of the offences forming the foundation of the said order were committed by the detenu when he was a juvenile.

The division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju allowed a habeas corpus plea filed by the detenue's mother and set aside the detention order issued in December 2025 by the State's home department.

The court also clarified that no 'subjective satisfaction' could have been derived from the offences committed as a Juvenile so as to pass a detention order 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.

“In the facts and circumstances of the instant case, where several of the offences which are relied on to justify the preventive detention were committed at a time when the detenue had not attained the age of 18 years and were not cases where he was tried as an adult for heinous offences, we are of the opinion, that the very fact that those offences were taken into consideration for the purpose of arriving at the subjective satisfaction as to the detention of the detenue by itself would vitiate the Order of Detention and will go against the very purpose of the Juvenile Justice Act and Section 24 thereof”, the division bench remarked.

The court specifically discussed the scope of Section 24 of the Juvenile Justice Act(Care & Protection of Children), 2015 Act, which states that no juvenile should suffer any disqualification arising from a conviction under an offence which is not deemed heinous under Section 19 of the said Act.

The teenager detenue, who had found himself in the rowdy sheet, was born in 2006. He had turned 19 at the time when the detention order was passed in December, 2025. The state submitted that the detenue was a habitual offender and there were ten criminal cases registered against him from 2023 till 2025.

However, accepting the submissions made by the detainee's mother, the court pointed out that many offences, including the ones from 2023 and 2024, that created 'subjective satisfaction' for the detention order, were allegedly committed by the detainee when he was a minor.

After hearing both parties, the court emphasised that JJ Act, 2015 is a special legislation under Article 15(3) of the Constitution to give effect to clauses (e) and (f) of Articles 39, 45 and 47 of the Constitution and international covenants such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

“…It is therefore clear that it is only in the case of a child who has completed or is above the age of 16 years and has committed a heinous offence and has been tried as an adult, that the details of the conviction can be retained and that too, only by the Children's Court.…”, the court said.

“…we are of the opinion that the detention order under challenge in this writ petition cannot be sustained. The detention order is accordingly set aside. The detenue shall be enlarged and set at liberty, in case, his detention is not required in any other pending case”, the court further added.

The court, while allowing the habeas corpus plea, has asked the Registry to communicate the operative part of the order to the Superintendent of Central Prison, Bellary to ensure the immediate release of the detenue.

For The petitioner: Senior Advocate Hashmath Pasha and Advocate Kariappa N.A.

For the State:  Special Public Prosecutor B.A. Belliappa and HCGP P. Thejesh

Case Title: Smt. Marry Usha v. State of Karnataka & Ors.

Case No: WPHC No. 35 of 2026

Click Here To Read/ Download Order