No pertinent or convincing evidence, the authority cannot take legal action for the breach of maintaining public order under section 3 (1) of the Act. : Gujarat high court
TITLE: Dipakbhai Madhavbhai Baraiya v State of Gujarat
Decided On-: August 11, 2023
12592 of 2023
CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. A.S Supehia and Mr. M.R Mengdey
INTRODUCTION-
The current petition is intended to challenge a detention order that was issued on that date by the detaining authority, who is the respondent, in the course of exercising his or her authority under section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985, by holding the petitioner, who is a detenue as defined by section 2(b) of the Act.
FACTS OF THE CASE
Detenue contends that the three FIRs filed for offences under Sections 65(A)(E), 81, and 116(b), Sections 65(A)(E), Sections 65(A)(E), Sections 65(A)(E), and Sections 65(A)(E), Sections 116(b), Sections 81, and Sections 98(2) of the Prohibition Act, respectively, are insufficient to establish the detenue’s eligibility for detention.
A knowledgeable attorney for the petitioner further argued that any illegal activity that is likely to be committed or is alleged to have been committed cannot be connected to or have anything to do with maintaining public order; at most, it can be considered a violation of law and order. In addition, other than witness statements and the filing of the aforementioned FIRs, there is no other pertinent or convincing evidence linking the alleged anti-social behaviour of the detainee to a breach of public order. The learned advocate further argued that it is not possible to conclude from the facts of the case that the detainee’s involvement in criminal cases had a negative impact on society’s social fabric and eventually posed a threat to the very survival of people’s normal, everyday lives or that the detainee’s registration of criminal cases had thrown the entire social system into disarray and rendered it dysfunctional.
COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION
AGP for the respondent Considering the circumstances of the case, the detaining authority properly issued the order of detention, and the detention order deserves to be upheld by this Co. The State supported the detention order passed by the authority and argued that sufficient information and evidence discovered during the course of the investigation, which was also supplied to the detenu, indicate that the detenu is in the habit of engaging in the activity as defined under Section 2(b) of the Act.
It is determined that the subjective satisfaction reached by the detaining authority cannot be said to be legal, valid, or in accordance with law because the offences alleged in the FIR/s cannot have any bearing on the public order as required under the Act and other relevant penal laws are sufficient enough to take care of the situation. This is because the offences alleged in the FIR/s cannot have any bearing on the public order as required under the Act and other relevant penal laws are sufficient enough to take care of the situation. In those circumstances, it cannot be said that the detainee is a person who would fall within the meaning of section 2(b) of the Act unless and until the material is there to make out a case that the person has become a threat & menace to the Society so as to disturb the whole tempo of the society and that all social apparatus goes in peril disturbing public order at the instance of such person. Nothing in the record, aside from general statements, indicates that the detainee is acting in a way that could endanger the peace of the community.
In light of the foregoing, we are inclined to grant this petition because simple FIR registration by itself cannot be connected to a violation of maintaining public order, the authority cannot pursue a claim under the Act, and there is no other pertinent or convincing evidence to support the exercise of the authority granted by section 3 (1) of the Act.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a 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- Steffi Desousa