Back
ILESH J. VORA, S. V. PINTO
Sanjiv @ Chanchal S/O Surendra Bahadursinh Thro Pooja Sanjiv Singh Rajput – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)
1. The present petition is directed against the order of detention dated 16.10.2024 passed by the passed by the Police Commissioner, Surat City in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3(1) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short ‘the Act’), whereby the respondent - detaining authority has detained the petitioner - detenue as defined under Section 2(g) of the Act.
2. This Court has heard learned counsel Mr.Arjunsingh Chauhan and Ms.Jirga Jhaveri learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respective parties.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner - detenue submits that the impugned order of detention is required to be quashed and set-aside since the detaining authority has passed the order of detention solely on the ground of registration of two FIRs (i) for the offences under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act and Section 370(A)(2) of IPC dated 18.02.2024 registered with Vesu Police Station, Surat and (II) for the offences under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act dated 03.06.2024 registered with Vesu Police Station, Surat and that by itself cannot bring
Preventive detention requires clear evidence of a threat to public order, not merely the existence of criminal charges, to justify the detention.
Preventive detention requires substantial evidence linking the detainee's actions to a threat to public order, not merely the registration of FIRs.
Preventive detention requires clear evidence of disruption to public order, not merely the existence of criminal charges.
Preventive detention requires clear evidence of a threat to public order, not merely the existence of FIRs; such orders cannot substitute for ordinary law enforcement.
Preventive detention cannot be justified solely on the basis of FIRs; there must be a clear and direct impact on public order.
Preventive detention must be based on substantial evidence showing a threat to public order, not merely on the existence of criminal charges.
Preventive detention must demonstrate a clear threat to public order, not merely rely on the existence of FIRs.
Preventive detention must be based on substantial evidence showing a threat to public order, not merely on the existence of criminal charges.
Preventive detention must demonstrate a clear threat to public order, not merely rely on criminal charges or FIRs.
Preventive detention must be based on substantial evidence showing a threat to public order, not merely on the existence of criminal charges.
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
