Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
ILESH J. VORA, SANDEEP N. BHATT, JJ
RAMCHANDRA @ RAMU S/O SUDARSHAN SWAI THROUGH KAMLESH RAMACHAL SAHNI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
(ILESH J. VORA, J.)
1. The present petition is directed against the order of detention dated 20.02.2025 passed by the passed by the Police Commissioner, Surat, 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. A. B. Chauhan and Ms. C. M. Shah, 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 three FIRs being (i) for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act and Section 370(c)(2) of IPC dated 29.02.2024 with Mahidharpura Police Station and (ii) for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act dated 23.06.2024 with Mahidharpura Town Police Station, (iii) for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4
Preventive detention under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act requires evidence that the detenue's activities adversely affect public order; mere criminal allegations are insufficie....
Preventive detention requires clear evidence that a person's activities adversely affect public order, not merely law and order.
Preventive detention requires substantial evidence that a person's activities threaten public order, not just mere allegations or FIR registrations.
Preventive detention requires a clear nexus to public order disturbances, not merely the existence of criminal charges.
The judgment emphasizes the distinction between 'law and order' and 'public order', highlighting that the mere registration of FIRs for offenses may not necessarily indicate a breach of public order ....
Preventive detention requires a clear connection to public order disturbance, not merely the existence of criminal charges.
The registration of FIRs alone may not establish a nexus with the breach of maintenance of public order as required under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985.
Preventive detention requires a clear demonstration of a threat to public order, not merely the existence of criminal charges.
The detention order based on the registration of FIRs must have a nexus with the breach of maintenance of public order, and the authority cannot have recourse under the Act without relevant and cogen....
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
