JUDGMENT :

A.Y. KOGJE, J.

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for following relief:

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIP be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or directions of this Hon’ble High Court, quashing and setting aside the detention order dated 22/09/2023 at Annexure ‘A’ to the petition placing the petitioner under preventive detention, in purported exercise of their powers under the Gujarat Prevention of Antisocial Activities act, 1985, as being illegal, null and void and further be pleased to released the petitioner forthwith.”

2. The challenge is to the order of detention dated 22.09.2023 by the detaining authority namely Commissioner of Police, City Ahmedabad, by which the petitioner has been detained as a “dangerous person” based on two offences registered against him.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner has challenged the order of detention on the ground that the incidents which are referred to in the FIR are arising out of the private dispute and has no bearing on public order. Learned advocate has also argued that though the petitioner was enlarged on regular bail by the Court of appropriate jurisdiction, the detaining authority has not resorted to the lesser drastic remedy and therefore, the order of detention is against the ratio of the Apex Court in case of Shaik Nazeen vs. State of Telangana and Others, 2023 (9) SCC 633. It also argued that from the record that the order of detention is passed the very next day when the petitioner was enlarged on regular bail and therefore, the subjective satisfaction appears to have been arrived at in a mechanical manner.

4. As against this, learned Assistant Government Pleader by objecting the petition submitted that prior hereto also on two occasions, in the year 2021 and 2022, the petitioner was detained as a dangerous person and even after the indulgence shown by this Court, the petitioner has not meant his ways and has continued to indulge in the IPC offenses and therefore, the detaining authority was left with no choice, but to pass the order of detention.

5. In rejoinder, learned advocate submitted that the detention orders have been quashed by this Court by an order in Special Civil Application No. 21574 of 2022 vide order dated 10.11.2022 and therefore, the detaining authority ought to have taken into consideration the subsequent development as well as it is relevant for the purpose of subjective satisfaction.

6. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. The petitioner has challenged the order of detention dated 22.09.2023 passed by the detaining authority-Commissioner of Police, City Ahmedabad by relying upon two offences registered with Shahrekotda Police Station, detaining the petitioner as dangerous person. The details of the offenses on which the detaining authority has relied upon are in tabular form as under:

7. The Court has taken into consideration the contents of the FIR relied upon by the detaining authority and the detail would reveal that the FIR is an outcome of a private dispute between the petitioner and the complainant on the issue of making payment of food purchased by the petitioner. In another offense relied upon by the detaining authority again between the petitioner and the complainant, an verbal altercation had taken place at the place where the post death ceremony was taking place and at that place scuffle took place resulting into registration of the FIR.

8. In the opinion of the Court, both the incidents are privat