ILESH J. VORA, S. V. PINTO
Rohit S/O Dipakbhai Varde Through Yenuben Dipakbhai Varde – 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 22.09.2024 passed by the respondent – detaining authority 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(ha) of the Act.
2. Heard the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner – detenue and learned APP appearing for the respondent State.
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 one FIR for the offences under Sections 354(A)(1), 506(2) of IPC an under Section 7 and 8 of the Protection from Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012; and that by itself cannot bring the case of the petitioner - detenue within the purview of definition under Section 2(ha) of the Act. Learned advocate for the petitioner – detenue further submitted that the illegal activities alleged to have
Dr.Ram Manohar Lohia vs. State of Bihar
K.Nageswara Naidu vs. Collector and District Magistrate, Kadapa
Mallada K. Sri Ram vs. The State of Telangana
Pushkar Mukherjee and others vs. The State of West Bengal
Syed Sabeena vs. The State of Telangana and others, reported in (2023)9 SCC 633
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 a threat to public order, not merely the existence of criminal charges, to justify the detention.
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 under the Gujarat Act requires a clear nexus to public order disturbance, not merely 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 registration 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 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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.