Mr. Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.

1. The instant Habeas Corpus writ petition has been field by the petitioner Indu Devi mother of the detenue Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa against the order dated 8.11.2016 (Annex.1) passed by the District Magistrate, Bikaner and order dated 19.11.2016 (Annex.4) so also, the order dated 27.12.2016 (Annex.7) passed by the State Government whereby the son of the petitioner Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa was ordered to be detained for one year commencing from 9.11.2016 to 8.11.2017 under Section 3 of the Rajasthan Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2006 for short).

2. As per facts of the case, upon report submitted by the Superintendent of Police, Bikaner dated 7.11.2016 for taking action against detenu, the District Magistrate, Bikaner while exercising its power under Section 3(1) of the Act of 2006 considered the report in which on the basis of 13 cases registered against detenue Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa, a prayer was made to take action against son of the petitioner under the Act of 2006. The District Magistrate, Bikaner on the basis of above report passed an order to arrest Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa on 8.11.2016 and sent the case of detenue for approval to the State Government. The State Government approved the order passed by the District Magistrate, Bikaner vide communication dated 19.11.2016, thereafter, the case of the detenue Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa was placed before the advisory board for confirmation. The advisory board after providing an opportunity confirmed the detention order vide order dated 7.12.2016. The State Government after confirmation by the Advisory Board passed an order on 27/28.12.2016 whereby the petitioner’s son Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa was ordered to be detained for one year under Section 3 of the Act of 2006.

3. As a matter of fact, the action was taken against detenue Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa under Section 3 of the Act of 2006 on the ground that number of cases were registered against him in the various Police Stations of Bikaner punishable under IPC and Arms Act and as per report of the Superintendent of Police, Bikaner, it was not possible for the administration to restrain the criminal activities of the detenu, therefore it was thought it proper to take action against him.

4. According to details incorporated in the report, in all 13 criminal cases were registered against the detenue in different Police Stations of Bikaner under IPC and three entries were also recorded in the Rojnamcha soon before the order of detention dated 8.11.2016 and a complaint under Section 110 of the Cr.P.C. was also filed against detenue.

5. In this writ petition while challenging the aforesaid orders, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of detention passed against the detenue Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa is illegal because it has been passed without application of mind by the District Magistrate, Bikaner. While inviting attention towards the fact that out of 13 cases registered against the detenue, in six cases, he has already been acquitted from the competent criminal trial court and other cases are pending, in none of the case finding of conviction has been recorded against detenue. More so, it is a case in which the District Magistrate, Bikaner has illegally exercised its powers without any material evidence under Section 3 of the Act of 2006. It is also argued that after passing detention order though the case of the detenue Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa was referred to the advisory board as contemplated under the Act of 2005, where the detenue Bhupendra Singh @ Bhupsa appeared and submitted his representation (Annex.6) against the detention order, but unfortunately, the advisory board did not consider the grounds raised by him in his representation objectively and approved the detention order on ipsi dixit grounds.

6. Lear