Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ILESH J. VORA, P.M. RAVAL
Angatkumar Motibhai Prajapati, Thro Sandeep Kumar Dubey – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. detainment based solely on firs lacks justification for public order disruption. (Para 1 , 10) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties concerning the legality of the detention. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. court examines the distinction between law and order versus public order. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT :
P. M. RAVAL, J.
1. The present petition is filed against the order of detention dated 25.07.2025 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.R V. Rathod and Ms. Jyotiben Bhatt 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 (1) for the offences under Sections 3 ,4,5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic Preve
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 criminal charges, to justify the detention.
Preventive detention must demonstrate a clear threat to public order, not merely rely on 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 cannot be justified solely on the basis of FIRs; there must be a clear and present danger to public order.
Preventive detention cannot be justified solely on FIR registrations; there must be substantial evidence of a threat to 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 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.
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
