Back
A. Y. KOGJE, SAMIR J. DAVE
Samirkhan Alias Samir Bhajiyo S/o. Fakirakhan Pathan, Through His Wife Anjumbanu, W/o. Samirkhan Patha – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.Y. KOGJE, J.
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed with prayers as under:
B. That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the detention order being PCB/PASA/DTN/829 of 2023 dated 03.10.2023 passed by the respondent No.2 herein and executed on 03.10.2023 which is at Annexure-‘A’ by way of issuing appropriate writ, order or direction in the interest of justice.
C. Pending admission and/or final disposal of this petition this Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay the implementation, execution and operation of the order dated 03.10.2023 passed by the respondent No.2 herein.
D. That this Hon'ble Court may pleased to dispense with the affidavit as the petitioner is in jail and in turn this Hon'ble court be pleased to accept the affidavit filed by the wife of - the petitioner.”
2. The present petition is directed against order of detention dated 03-10-2023 passed by the respondent – detaining authority in exercise of powers conferred under section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short “the Act”) by detaining the petitioner
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the detention under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 requires a nexus with the breach of public order, and the failu....
The detention order can be quashed if the offenses do not disturb public order, and the delay in passing the order is fatal.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that preventive detention should be considered only when there is a clear nexus with the breach of maintenance of public order, and alternative ....
The distinction between 'law and order' and 'public order' as laid down in Pushker Mukherjee v/s. State of West Bengal [AIR 1970 SC 852] was central to the court's decision.
The judgment established that preventive detention should be based on a genuine threat to public order, and alternative measures should be considered before resorting to preventive detention.
The judgment established the principle that preventive detention should be invoked only when there is a clear impact on public order, and the detaining authority should consider lesser drastic remedi....
The judgment establishes that preventive detention should be exercised in exceptional circumstances and less drastic remedies should be considered before resorting to such measures.
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
