Back
A. Y. KOGJE, SAMIR J. DAVE
Sahilkhan @ Sherkhan Ayubkhan Pathan Through Ayubkhan Rashidkhan Pathan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.Y. Kogje, J.
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for following relief:-
2. Thus, essentially, the challenge is to the order of detention dated 11.10.2023 passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad, respondent No.2 herein, by which the petitioner has been detained as a “dangerous person” based on two offences registered against him, details of which are as under:-
| Sr. No. | Name of Police Station | CR No. and date | Sections | Date of bail order |
| 1. | Anandnagar Police Station | 11191001230084 of 2023 dated 12.04.2023 | 379 (A3) and 114 of IPC | 20.05.2023 |
| 2. | Ellisbridge Police Station | 11191014230189 of 2023 dated 23.08.2023 | 379 and 114 of IPC | 07.10.2023 |
3. Learned advocate for
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a 'live and proximate link' between the prejudicial activities and the purpose of detention in preventive detention cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the detention order under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 must be in accordance with the requirement of public orde....
The contravention of any law must affect the community or the public at large to be considered a breach of public order, and the detaining authority must promptly consider alternatives such as cancel....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the contravention of any law must affect the community or the public at large to constitute a breach of public order under the Gujarat Prevent....
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the registration of FIRs alone cannot justify invoking power under section 3(2) of the Preventive Detention Act, and the detaining authority m....
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 detention order must have a live and proximate link between prejudicial activities and the purpose of detention, and delay in passing the detention order can vitiate the detention order.
The contravention of any law must affect the community or the public at large to be considered as affecting public order, and the detaining authority must consider the option of cancelling the petiti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the detaining authority should act with urgency in cases involving activities that can be termed antisocial, and unreasonable delay in passing....
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
