Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S.GADKARI, RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE
Ismail Mainuddin Sherikar – Appellant
Versus
Criminal Writ Petition No. 4798 Of 2025 – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
1. By the present Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioner seeks to quash and set aside the Detention Order, bearing OW. No.CRIME/PCB/DET/YERWADA/SHERIKAR/320/2025, dated 16th April 2025 (the Detention Order), passed by the Respondent No.2 issued 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 Petitioner who has been detained in the Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar Central Prison be released.
2. By Order dated 18th September 2025, this Court granted time to the Respondents to file their Affidavits in Reply. The Respondents have filed their respective Affidavits in Reply dealing with the contentions/grounds raised by the Petitioner and opposed the Petition.
3. We have heard Mr. Amit Mane, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Shreekant V. Gavand, APP for the Respondent–State. Perused the record and the Affidavits in Reply.
4. At the outset, it would be important to mention the
The validity of a detention order can be upheld even when the detainee is in custody, provided the Detaining Authority shows a likelihood of future harmful conduct upon release on bail.
Confirmed detention order - Subjective satisfaction arrived by Detaining Authority that acts and conduct of petitioner were prejudicial to maintenance of public order cannot be faulted at.
Preventive detention must be justified by recent criminal actions that pose a clear threat to public order; reliance on stale offences is insufficient without a direct nexus.
The failure to consider the orders of bail granted to the detenu by the competent Court vitiated the detention order, as it deprived the detaining authority of the opportunity to consider relevant ma....
The main legal point established is that the impugned detention order was based on specific cases and witness statements, and the delay in issuing the order was properly explained by the detaining Au....
The court established that the failure to consider an anticipatory bail order when issuing a detention order under the M.P.D. Act vitiates the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority, ther....
Preventive detention requires clear evidence of the likelihood of release and necessity for detention; vague assertions are insufficient.
Point of Law : Preventive Detention - Criminal activities by using deadly weapons - Detention order quashed - There is no material which would justify inference that activities indulged in by petitio....
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
