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 :
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.
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 Prevention Act dated 09.06.2024 with Vesu Police Station, and (2) for the offences under Section 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act and Section 144-2
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
