Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S.GADKARI, RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE
Nilofer Ramjan Shaikh – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Police, Pune City – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
1. Petitioner, the mother of the Detenue, by present Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks to quash and set aside the Detention Order, bearing No. OW. No. CRIME PCB/DET/KALEPADAL/SHAIKH/384/2025, dated 5th May 2025, issued by the Respondent No.1 i.e. Commissioner of Police, Pune City (Detaining Authority) under Section 3 (2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Dangerous Persons, Video Pirates, Sand Smugglers and Persons engaged in Black Marketing of Essential Commodities Act, 1981 (MPDA Act). The Petitioner, further prays that the Detenue being detained in the Wardha Prison be released and set at liberty.
2. By Order dated 22nd July 2025, this Court had issued Notice to the Respondents. The Respondent Nos.1 to 3 have filed their Affidavits in reply and opposed the Petition.
3. We have heard Ms. Misbaah Solkar, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Shreekant V. Gavand, learned APP for the Respondents. Perused the record and the Affidavits in Reply filed by the Respondent Authorities.
4. At the outset, learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits tha
Preventive detention requires acts that threaten public order to justify detention; unexplained delays in issuing detention orders render them invalid.
Criminal activities - Detention order - Both predicate offences, in our view, do not shed light on the activities, which had propensity to cause or calculated to cause harm, danger or alarm or a feel....
The detention order must be in accordance with the law and based on a genuine threat to public order. The failure to consider alternative measures, such as cancelling bail, and the delay in passing t....
The judgment established the importance of the impact on public order and the requirement for the detaining authority to provide a reasonable explanation for any delay in issuing the detention order.
The detaining authority must satisfactorily explain any delay in passing a detention order and must apply its mind and arrive at subjective satisfaction based on the grounds of detention.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that preventive detention should not be a substitute for ordinary law, and the detaining authority must ensure legal and valid subjective satisfact....
Preventive detention should only be used in rare and exceptional cases where the activities of the detainee affect public order, and vital facts that could influence the detaining authority's decisio....
Preventive detention requires a clear demonstration of how actions disturb public order, not merely law and order, with timely issuance reflecting genuine concern for community safety.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
