The court emphasizes the importance of protecting personal liberty under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution and warns against using preventive detention as a substitute for ordinary criminal law.
Case- Bharatbhai Vallabhbhai Golani … vs State Of Gujara
Decided on: 3rd may
CORAM: HON’BLE Justice A.S.Supeiah
Introduction
The present petition challenges an order of detention dated 01.04.2023 passed by the respondent – detaining authority under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (the Act). The petitioner-detenu has been detained based on the registration of four FIRs for offenses under Sections 379, 447, 411, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, which the petitioner’s advocate argues are not sufficient to bring the case under the Act’s definition.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner’s advocate contends that the alleged illegal activities do not have any nexus with the maintenance of public order and, at most, can be considered a breach of law and order. The detaining authority is accused of not considering the fact that the petitioner is released on bail for all the offenses.
On the other hand, the state’s advocate supports the detention order, stating that sufficient material and evidence were found during the investigation, indicating the petitioner’s involvement in activities falling under the Act’s definition.
Judgement
After hearing both sides and examining the documents, the court finds that the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority cannot be considered legal, valid, and in accordance with the law. The offenses alleged in the FIRs do not affect public order as required under the Act, and other relevant penal laws can handle the situation. The court cites previous Supreme Court decisions that emphasize the distinction between “law and order” and “public order” and the need for caution when passing preventive detention orders.
The court also refers to a recent decision in which the Supreme Court criticized the routine and unjustified use of preventive detention laws in the state, directing the authorities to evaluate the fairness of the detention orders against lawful standards.
In conclusion, the court finds that the detaining authority did not apply its mind properly, and the order of detention is quashed and set aside.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has over 20 years of experience in various sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Aadit Shah