ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE)

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is inter alia filed for following prayer:-

“(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue appropriate writ, direction or order of this Hon’ble High Court, quashing and setting aside the detention order dated 05.10.2023 passed by the respondent no.2 (Annexure ‘A’ Colly) placing the petitioner under preventive detention, in purported exercise of their powers under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 as being illegal, null and void and further be pleased to release the petitioner forthwith.”

2. The present petition is directed against order of detention dated 05.10.2023 passed by the respondent–detaining authority in exercise of powers conferred under section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short “the Act”) by detaining the petitioner–detenue as defined under section 2(c) of the Act. Under the order of detention dated 05.10.2023 passed by the District Magistrate, Botad by which the petitioner has been detained as a ‘dangerous person’ based on three offenses, which are registered within the Barwala Police Station.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner at the outset has submitted that the detention order would not survive as the very first offense registered at Barvala Police Station against the petitioner, the petitioner has been acquitted after the trial by the judgment and order dated 14.02.2024 in Criminal Case No.391 of 2023. Learned advocate has thereafter, argued that the detention order is not justified as offenses in which the petitioner has been involved are of private nature, wherein on account of the private dispute, the incident has taken place and in fact, second offense in the grounds of detention is filed by the relative of the complainant of the very first offense, where the petitioner has now been acquitted.

3.1 Learned advocate has thereafter submitted that though the petitioner has been enlarged on regular bail in connection with this offense, the order of detention is passed belatedly almost after a period of three months.

4. As against this, learned Assistant Government Pleader has objected to the grant of the petition by submitting that the detaining authority was justified as the petitioner is involved in three serious offenses under Chapter XV and XVI of the IPC and being involved in quick succession, the petitioner can be rightly considered as a habitual offender covered under the definition under Section 2(c) as a dangerous person.

5. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. The first aspect pointed out to the Court is that the detaining authority-District Magistrate, Botad by an order dated 05.10.2023 has detained the petitioner as a dangerous person by relying upon three offenses, details of which are as under:-

6. The Court has therefore, taken into consideration the very first offense registered at Barvala Police Station for offense under Sections 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the IPC which came to be tried by the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Barvala vide Criminal Case No.391 of 2023 and by the judgment and order dated 14.02.2024, the petitioner and other co-accused have been acquitted. A copy of the order placed by learned advocate for the petitioner is taken on record.

7. The Court has thereafter, considered the fact that the petitioner who was involved in third offense at Barvala Police station on 06.07.2023