Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VIKRAM NATH, A.J. SHASTRI, JJ.
Rajubhai Ranabhai Odedara – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 1644 of 2019 in R/Special Civil Application No. 17203 of 2014, Civil Application No. 1 of 2019 in R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 1644 of 2019 and Civil Application No. 2 of 2019 in R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 1644 of 2019
Decided On : 27-12-2019
Letters Patent Appeal - Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 - Section 2 Section 4 Section 5 Section 9 - Bombay Police Act – Detention order – Director General of Police and the Principal Secretary, Home are directed to issue circulars to Authorities all over the State to ensure the execution of the detention orders forthwith wherever passed, as per the manner prescribed under the 1985 Act and not to keep the detention orders only on file. Such inaction has serious consequences and reflects insensitivity and may be deliberate mischief on the part of the State authorities
Facts of the Case:
Appellant, who was also the original writ petitioner, was facing number of criminal cases - To declare that the respondents have no power, authority or competence to pass order of preventive detention - To restrain the respondents, their agents and servants from arresting the petitioner for preventive detention in connection with the first information reports referred in the memo of this petition
Finding of the Court:
A detention order is a preventive measure. It is only in rare cases where there is threat to public order being disturbed that such action is taken. In order to initiate a process for passing a detention order, the Sponsoring Authority which is normally the Inspector or the Police officials of a particular Police Station on being satisfied about threat of public order being disturbed by any person falling under the various categories provided under the PASA submits a report accompanied by all the relevant material to the Detaining Authority authorized by the State. Such Detaining Authority after examining the recommendation and the material accompanying it and being subjectively satisfied that the grounds exist for passing a detention order that it proceeds to pass a detention order. What is to be noticed is that the Sponsoring Authority and the Detaining Authority both have to satisfy themselves with all the material before them that a particular person is required to be detained as a preventive measure so as to maintain public order in the area. They also have to examine and record a finding that if such person is not detained by way of this preventive measure, there would be likelihood of breach of peace and disturbance of public order – Directions issued
Result: Letter Patent Appeal dismissed
JUDGMENT :
Vikram Nath, C.J.
1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed assailing the correctness of the judgment and order dated 05.09.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 17203 of 2014 whereby the writ petition was dismissed with cost of Rs. 10,000/-.
2. The present appellant, who was also the original writ petitioner, was facing number of criminal cases as set out in paragraph Nos. 5 to 15. Each paragraph contains the details of separate First Information Reports under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code and other offences, for example, under the Prohibition Act and the Bombay Police Act also. The details of each of the case are mentioned hereunder:
| Sr. No. | Details of the case | Result of the case |
| 1. | First Information Report for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 504, 323, 506(2), 330, 114 and 109 of Indian Penal Code registered as CR-I No. 212 of 1992 numbered as Criminal Case No. 773 of 1993. | Acquitted vide judgment and order dated 31.3.1997 |
| 2. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Section 135 of Bombay Police Act culminated into Criminal Case No. 518 of 1997. | Acquitted vide judgment and order dated 10-5-2007 |
| 3. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 114 of Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of Bombay Police Act culminated into Criminal Case No. 46 of 1997. | Acquitted vide judgment and order dated 5-12-2003 |
| 4. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Section 122-C of Bombay Police Act culminated into Criminal Case No. 5232 of 2003. | Released as per provisions of Section 360 of Cr.P.C., 1973 and Section 3 of Probation of Offenders Act. |
| 5. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 506(2) of Indian Penal Code culminated into Criminal Case No. 480 of 2003. | Acquitted vide judgment and order dated 10.2.2012 |
| 6. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code read with Section 135 of Bombay Police Act culminated into Criminal Case No. 6034 of 2007. | Acquitted vide judgment and order dated 22.6.2011 |
| 7. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Sections 4 and 5 of Prevention of Gambling Act culminated into Criminal Case No. 6905 of 2007. | Acquitted vide judgment and order dated 22.6.2011 |
| 8. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of Indian Penal Code read with Section 135 of Bombay Police Act culminated into Criminal Case No. 1131 of 2008. | Acquitted vide judgment and order dated 9.4.2008 |
| 9. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Sections 66(1)(b), 65(E), 116-B and 81 of Prohibition Act which is numbered as C.R-III No. 29 of 2013. | Released on bail vide order dated 13.1.2013 |
| 10. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 144 and 504 of Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of Bombay Police Act numbered as CR-I No. 4 of 2014 | Released on bail vide order dated 13.3.2014 |
| 11. | First Information Report for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 365, 307, 323, 504, 506(2) and 201 of Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of Gujarat Police Act numbered as CR-I No. 75 of 2014. | Released on regular bail vide order dated 10-11-2014 |
3. In paragraph No. 2 of the petition, it is stated that the petitioner-proposed detenue is approaching the High Court through his son Lakhan Rajubhai Odedara as the petitioner is already detained in judicial custody in connection with First Information Report being CR-1 No. 75 of 2014 under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 365, 307, 323 and 506(2) of IPC. It is further mentioned in
SupremeToday
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
