Preventive detention orders under the Rajasthan Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act must comply with procedural requirements, including affording the detenu an opportunity for representation after detention but before approval, which is distinct from the approval process itself.

ORDER :

Munnuri Laxman, J.

1. All these Habeas Corpus Petitions have been filed challenging the detention and confirmation orders passed by the District Magistrate and State Government under the Rajasthan Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 2006 (herein after referred to as, “the Act”), whereby the corpuses were detained as preventive measure for one year.

2. The facts in each of the petitions are as follows:-

(A) Habeas Corpus Petition No.87/2024:

(i) The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur East has submitted a report dated 20.10.2023 to the District Magistrate, Jodhpur requesting him to initiate the proceedings for preventive detention against the detenue-Pawan Solanki. The report reflects that the detenue was involved in 17 FIRs registered at various Police Stations within the jurisdiction of Deputy Commissioner of Police Jodhpur East for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 149, 212, 279, 224, 307, 323, 327, 336, 341, 353, 364-A, 379, 384, 386, 387, 392, 395, 420, 427, 436, 454, 504, 506, 34, 120-B of IPC, under Section 3 /25 of ARMS ACT and Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The detenue was acquitted in FIR No.203/2006, P.S. Mandore and FIR No.296/213, P.S. Mandore but out of them, in one case, acquittal was based on the compromise. He was convicted in FIR No.67/2010, P.S. Mandore. Whereas, in FIR No.223/2017, P.S. Mandore, this Court quashed the FIR and in rest of the cases, the trials are pending. The report also reflects initiation of five proceedings under Sections 110 , 122 and 151 of Cr.P.C against the detenue.

(ii) On the basis of the above report, the District Magistrate passed the detention order dated 20.10.2023 while exercising power under sub-Section (2) of Section 3 of the Act. Subsequently, the District Magistrate submitted a report as required under Section 3 (3) of the Act to the State Government for approval. The State Government approved the detention order of the District Magistrate vide order dated 30.10.2023. Later, the detenue was detained on 22.11.2023. The grounds of detention as required under Section 9 of the Act were immediately served to the detenue on the same day informing his right to make a representation to the State Government. The detenue has not submitted any representation. The State Government made a reference to the Advisory Board under Section 11 of the Act for opinion of the Advisory Board constituted under Section 10 of the Act. The Advisory Board rendered the opinion dated 19.12.2023 opining that there were sufficient grounds to pass the detention order by the District Magistrate. On the basis of such opinion, the State Government passed the order dated 22.12.2023 confirming the detention order. Aggrieved by the same the present Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed.

(B) Habeas Corpus Petition No.211/2024:

(i) The Superintendent of Police, Bikaner made a report/ complaint dated 27.03.2024 requesting the District Magistrate, Bikaner to commence the proceedings for preventive detention of the detenue-Dana Ram Siyag. The report shows that the detenue was involved in 13 criminal cases registered at various Police Stations for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 327, 336, 341, 342, 353, 354, 365, 379, 382, 384, 386, 387, 504, 34, of IPC, under Section 3 /25, 3/25(1-B)(A), 25, 25(