IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment establishes that preventive detention should be exercised in exceptional circumstances and less drastic remedies should be considered before resorting to such measures.

JUDGMENT :

(A.Y. Kogje, J.)

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed with prayers as under:

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue appropriate writ, direction or order of this Hon'ble High Court, quashing and setting aside the detention order dated 28.09.2023 at Annexure ‘A’, to’ the petition placing the petitioner under preventive detention, in purported exercise of their powers under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985, as being illegal, null and void and further be pleased to released the petitioner forthwith;

(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to release the petitioner from his detention pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition.’”

2. The present petition is directed against order of detention dated 28-09-2023 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 – detenue as defined under section 2(c) of the Act.

3. Essentially challenge is made to the order of detention dated 28- 09-2023, where the petitioner has been detained as ‘Dangerous person’ on the grounds of seven F.I.R. registered against him with Gandhigram Police Station by the Detaining Authority namely the Police Commissioner, Rajkot City.

3.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been arraigned as an accused in seven offences of chain snatching only on the basis of his own admission in the Police Statement. It is submitted that from the case papers annexed along with grounds of detention, there is no sufficient evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence and therefore, subjective satisfaction of the petitioner undertaking anti-social activities to disturb the public order stands vitiated.

3.2 Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been enlarged on regular bail by the Court of competent jurisdiction, yet the Detaining Authority or the Sponsoring Authority have not considered lessor drastic remedy available.

3.3 In this connection, learned Advocate for the petitioner has referred to and relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shaik Nazeen v/s. State of Telanga and Ors. reported in 2023 (9) SCC 633 and drawing attention of this Court to the facts of the case before the Apex Court, which indicates that the detenue therein was also similarly involved in offences of gold chain snatching and was involved in as many as 36 gold chain snatching offences. Despite this, the Apex Court has proceeded to allow the petition of the detenue and setting him free on the ground that the Detaining Authority therein had sufficient alternative steps available to them to curtail the activities of the detenue therein. Learned Advocate has therefore, particularly drawn attention of this Court to Para-16, 17 and 19 of the aforesaid judgment.

4. As against this, learned AGP for the respondent State has objected to the petition on the ground that the petitioner is involved in seven offences of chain snatching and that offences would fall within Chapter- XVI and XVII of the IPC covered under definition of ‘Dangerous Person’ as contemplated in definition under the provisions of PASA Act. Moreover, the petitioner has been chargesheeted in each of the offences, where the Detaining Authority has found sufficient evidence to connect the petitioner with each of the offence and arrived at conclusion that the case of the petitioner would fall in the category of ‘Dangerous Person’ being habitual offender in similar offences.

5. Having heard learned advocates for the parties and having perused documents on record, it appears that the petitioner has been detained as ‘Dangerous Person’ by the order of detention dated 28.09.2023 by the Detaining Authority namely Police Commissioner, Rajkot City and along with the order of detention, grounds of detention is reflected that the Detain