[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] R/[CASE NUMBER] FORAPPROVALANDSIGNATURE: HONOURABLEMR[CASE NUMBER]JUSTICE[ENTITY] 1 WhetherReportersofLocalPapersmaybeallowed toseethejudgment? 2 TobereferredtotheReporterornot? 3 WhethertheirLordshipswishtoseethefaircopyof thejudgment? 4 Whetherthiscaseinvolvesasubstantialquestionof law as to the interpretation of the [ACT]? [ENTITY] Versus [ENTITY] Appearance: OIPATHAN(7684)forthePETITIONER(s)No[CASE NUMBER]1 MRBHARATVYASAGPfortheRESPONDENT(s)No[CASE NUMBER]3 RULESERVEDBYDS(65)fortheRESPONDENT(s)No[CASE NUMBER]1,2 CORAM: HONOURABLEMR[CASE NUMBER]JUSTICE[ENTITY] Date:27/08/2018 ORALJUDGMENT
1[CASE NUMBER] Heardlearnedadvocatesappearingfortherespectiveparties[CASE NUMBER]
2[CASE NUMBER] Thepresentpetitionisdirectedagainstorderofdetentiondated 01[CASE NUMBER]06[CASE NUMBER]2018passedbytherespondent-detainingauthorityinexercise of powers conferred under [SECTION](2) of the Gujarat Prevention of [CASE NUMBER] AntiSocialActivitiesAct,1985(forshort"theAct")bydetainingthe petitioner-detenueasdefinedundersection2(bbb)oftheAct[CASE NUMBER]
3[CASE NUMBER] The case of the petitioner is that on account of two offences whichareregisteredasC[CASE NUMBER]R[CASE NUMBER]No[CASE NUMBER]I12of2018withGIDCVatvaPolice [CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER]I70of2018registeredwithVatva PoliceStationon10[CASE NUMBER]05[CASE NUMBER]2018,thoughthepetitionerwasreleasedon regularbailandthereisnomaterialsufficientenoughtoarraignedthe petitioner,stilltheauthoritywithoutapplicationofmindhaspassed theorder ofdetention which is made thesubject matter ofpresent petition[CASE NUMBER]TheCourtafterperusalofthematerialwaspleasedtoadmit the petition on 13[CASE NUMBER]06[CASE NUMBER]2018 and thereafter, it has come up for final hearingbeforethisCourt,inwhichlearnedadvocateMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] hasrepresentedthepetitionerwhereasMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY]learnedAGP has appeared on behalf of the respondent - State[CASE NUMBER] With this background,thepresentpetitionisbeingtakenupforfinalhearing[CASE NUMBER]
4[CASE NUMBER] Learned advocate for the detenue submits that the order of detentionimpugnedinthispetitiondeservestobequashedandset aside on the ground of registration of two offences under the [ACT] [ACT]byitselfcannotbring thecaseofthedetenuewithinthepurviewofdefinitionunder[SECTION]oftheAct[CASE NUMBER]Further,learnedadvocateforthedetenuesubmits that illegal activity likely to be carried out or alleged to have been carried out,as alleged, cannot have any nexus or bearing with the maintenance of public order and at the most, it can be said to be breach of law and order[CASE NUMBER] Further, except statement of witnesses, registration of above FIR/s and [ENTITY] drawnin pursuance of theinvestigation,nootherrelevantandcogentmaterialisonrecord connecting allegedantisocial activityofthedetenuewithbreachof publicorder[CASE NUMBER]Learnedadvocateforthepetitionerfurthersubmitsthat [CASE NUMBER] itisnotpossibletoholdonthebasisofthefactsofthepresentcase that activity of the detenue with respect to the criminal cases had affectedeventempoofthesocietycausingthreattotheveryexistence ofnormalandroutinelifeofpeopleatlargeorthatonthebasisof criminal cases, the detenue had put the entire social apparatus in disorder, making it difficult for whole system to exist as a system governed by rule of law by disturbing public order[CASE NUMBER] It is further submittedbythelearnedadvocateforthepetitionerthatthepetitioner isnotnamedintheFIRsandisfalselyimplicated[CASE NUMBER]
4[CASE NUMBER]1[CASE NUMBER] Ithasfurtherbeencontendedthatbythelearnedadvocatefor thepetitionerthatthereareonlytwooffencesinwhichthepetitioner hasbeenarraignedandsurprisingly,despitethefactthatthereisno specific role attributed to the petitioner, nor named in the FIR specifically onthebasisofmereinference,thepetitioner hasbeen arraigned[CASE NUMBER]Ithasbeenfurthercontendedthatthepetitionerhasbeen released on bailand both these cases are pending for investigation andthepetitionerexceptthese,havingnosuchcriminalantecedents which would warrant the authority to initiate the proceedings of detentionagainstthepetitioner[CASE NUMBER]Ithasfurtherbeen contended that even the muddamal has also not been recovered nor the car is recoveredandithascontendedspecificallythatinidenticalsituation, insimilarsetofcircumstance,theCourthassetasidetheimpugned orderofdetention[CASE NUMBER]Asaresultofthis,lookingtothelawlaiddownon the principle of detention, the Court may kindly set aside the impugnedorder[CASE NUMBER]
4[CASE NUMBER]2[CASE NUMBER] To substantiate the contention, a reference is made to the decision dated 05[CASE NUMBER]05[CASE NUMBER]2016 passed in [CASE NUMBER] [CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER] A further decision dated 17[CASE NUMBER]07[CASE NUMBER] [CASE NUMBER] [CASE NUMBER] there are tow several decision dated 19[CASE NUMBER]12[CASE NUMBER]2013 passed in [CASE NUMBER] dated 04[CASE NUMBER]07[CASE NUMBER]2018 and by referring to these decisions,arequestismadethatthehereisacaseinwhichtheorder ofdetentionisthoroughlyuncalledfor,notsustainableintheeyeof law[CASE NUMBER]Asaresultofthis,thereliefprayedforinthepetitionbegranted intheinterestofjustice[CASE NUMBER]
5[CASE NUMBER] LearnedAGPfortherespondentStatesupportedthedetention orderpassedbytheauthorityandsubmittedthatsufficientmaterial andevidencewasfoundduringthecourseofinvestigation,whichwas also supplied to the detenue indicate that detenue is in habit of indulgingintotheactivityasdefinedunder[SECTION] oftheAct and considering the facts of the case, the detaining authority has rightlypassedtheorderofdetentionanddetentionorderdeservesto beupheldbythisCourt[CASE NUMBER]
5[CASE NUMBER]1[CASE NUMBER] Learned AGP has further submitted that two consecutive incidents are sufficient enough for the authority to prevent the petitionerbypassingtheorderofdetentionandultimately,theorder ofdetentionistobepassedtopreventthepetitioner,Whenaperson hasnotbeenabletobepreventedbygenerallaw,andhereisacasein which looking to the activities which are narrated in the first informationreportsufficientinferenceispossibletobedrawnthatthe petitioner is a habitual offender and is falling within a purview to definition contained under [SECTION] of the Act[CASE NUMBER] It has further beencontendedthatsimplybecausethepetitionerisreleasedonbail, thesamewouldnotpreventtheauthorityfrompassinganyorderof detention[CASE NUMBER] On the contrary, looking to the entire chronology of narrationofthecomplaint,thepetitionerisrightlybeendealtwithby passing the order of detention[CASE NUMBER] The very object of the definition is [CASE NUMBER] submerged if the petitioner petitioner is allowed to challenge the orderinthemannerinwhichithasbeenchallengedbywayofthe present petition[CASE NUMBER] Looking to the material attached to the order of detention,notonlytwoincidentswhicharenarratedspecificallybut therearefewotherstatementsofwitnessesarealsosufficientenough toindicatethatthepetitionerisarraignedinoffences,habitualand consistentactivityissuchwhichdeservestobeprevented[CASE NUMBER]Asaresult ofthis,theauthorityisjustifiedinpassingtheorderofdetention[CASE NUMBER]By contendingthis,learnedAGPhassubmittedtodismissthepetition[CASE NUMBER] However,whileconcludingthesubmissions,learnedAGPhascandidly submittedthatinviewoftheaforesaiddecisionswhicharecitedin respect to the petitions which are referred to above, the matter is ultimatelylefttothediscretionoftheCourttoconsiderandthereis nodeviatingmaterialorcontentionisraisedbylearnedAGPtodeal withthisidenticalmatters[CASE NUMBER]Noothersubmissionshavebeenmade[CASE NUMBER]
6[CASE NUMBER] Havingheardlearnedadvocatesforthepartiesandconsidering thefactsandcircumstancesofthecase,itappearsthatthesubjective satisfactionarrivedatbythedetainingauthoritycannotbesaidtobe legal, valid and in accordance with law, inasmuch as the offences allegedintheFIR/scannothaveanybaringonthepublicorderas requiredunder the Act andother relevant penallaws aresufficient enoughtotakecareofthesituationandthattheallegationsashave beenlevelledagainstthedetenuecannotbesaidtobegermaneforthe purposeofbringingthedetenuewithinthemeaningofsection2(bbb) oftheAct[CASE NUMBER]Unlessanduntil,thematerialistheretomakeoutacase thatthepersonhasbecomeathreatandmenacetotheSocietysoas todisturbthewholetempoofthesocietyandthatallsocialapparatus isin peril disturbingpublicorderattheinstanceofsuchperson,it cannot be saidthat thedetenue is aperson within the meaning of [SECTION] of the Act[CASE NUMBER] Except general statements, there is no [CASE NUMBER] adequatematerialonrecordwhichshowsthatthedetenueisactingin suchamanner,whichisdangeroustothepublicorder[CASE NUMBER]
6[CASE NUMBER]1[CASE NUMBER] Further, The essential concept of the preventive detention is thatthedetentionofapersonisnottopunishhimforsomethinghe hasdonebuttopreventhimfromdoingit[CASE NUMBER]Thebasisofdetentionis the satisfaction of the executive of a reasonable probability of the likelihoodofthedetenuactinginamannersimilartohispastacts and preventing him by detention from doing the same[CASE NUMBER] A criminal convictionontheotherhandisforanactalreadydonewhichcanonly be possible by a trial and legal evidence[CASE NUMBER] There is no comparison betweentheprosecutioninaCourtoflawandadetentionorderunder theAct[CASE NUMBER]Oneisapunitiveactionandtheotherisapreventiveact[CASE NUMBER]In onecaseapersonispunishedtoproveonproofofhisguiltandthe standard is proof beyond the reasonable doubt whereas in the preventivedetentionamanispreventedfromdoingsomethingwhich it is necessary for reasons mentioned in [SECTION] of the Act to prevent[CASE NUMBER]
7[CASE NUMBER] Thepowerofpreventivedetentionisqualitativelydifferentfrom punitive detention[CASE NUMBER] The power of preventive detention is a precautionary power exercised inreasonable anticipation[CASE NUMBER]It may or maynotrelatetoanoffence[CASE NUMBER]Itisnotaparallelproceeding[CASE NUMBER]Itdoesnot overlapwithprosecutionevenifitreliesoncertainfactsforwhich prosecutionmaybelaunchedormayhavebeenlaunched[CASE NUMBER]Anorderof preventivedetention,maybemadebeforeorduringprosecution[CASE NUMBER]An order of preventive detention may be made with or without prosecutionandinanticipationorafterdischargeorevenacquittal[CASE NUMBER] The pendency of prosecution is no bar to an order of preventive detention[CASE NUMBER] An order of preventive detention is also not a bar to prosecution[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER]
8[CASE NUMBER] TheSupremeCourtonseveraloccasionsexaminedtheconcepts of "law and order" and "public Order"[CASE NUMBER] Immediately after the [ACT] came into force, a [ACT] Bench of the Supreme CourtinthecaseofBrijBhushan&Anotherv[CASE NUMBER]TheStateofDelhi, (1950) SCR 605 dealt with a case pertaining to public order[CASE NUMBER] The court observed that "public order" may well be paraphrased in the contextas"publictranquility"[CASE NUMBER]
8[CASE NUMBER]1 Another celebrated [ACT] Bench judgment of the [PRECEDENT] Bombay was detained under the MadrasMaintenanceofPublicOrderAct,1949[CASE NUMBER]Thedetentionorder waschallengeddirectlyintheSupremeCourtofIndiabyfilingawrit petitionunderArticle32ofthe[ACT][CASE NUMBER]Theallegationwasthat thedetenucirculateddocumentstodisturbthepublictranquilityand tocreatedisturbanceofpublicorderandtranquility[CASE NUMBER]
TheSupremeCourtobserved: " `Public order' is an expression of wide connotation and signifies that state of tranquillity which prevails among the membersofapoliticalsocietyasaresultofinternalregulations enforcedbytheGovernmentwhichtheyhaveestablished it must be taken that `public safety'is used as apart of the widerconceptofpublicorder "
9[CASE NUMBER] Thedistinctionbetween"publicorder"and"lawandorder"has been carefully defined in a [ACT] Bench judgment of the SupremeCourtinthecaseof Dr[CASE NUMBER][PRECEDENT][ENTITY], J[CASE NUMBER] by giving various illustrations clearly defined the "publicorder"and"lawandorder"[CASE NUMBER]Relevantportionofthejudgment [CASE NUMBER] readsthus:
" Does the expression "public order" take in every kind of disorderoronlysome?Theanswertothisservestodistinguish "public order" from "law and order" because the latter undoubtedlytakesinallofthem[CASE NUMBER]Publicorderifdisturbed,must leadtopublicdisorder[CASE NUMBER]Everybreachofthepeacedoesnotlead topublicdisorder[CASE NUMBER]Whentwodrunkardsquarrelandfightthere isdisorderbutnotpublicdisorder[CASE NUMBER]Theycanbedealtwithunder thepowerstomaintainlawandorderbutcannotbedetainedon thegroundthattheyweredisturbingpublicorder[CASE NUMBER]Supposethat thetwofighterswereofrivalcommunitiesandoneofthemtried toraisecommunalpassions[CASE NUMBER]Theproblemisstilloneoflawand order but it raises the apprehension of public disorder[CASE NUMBER] Other examples can be imagined[CASE NUMBER] The contravention of law always affectsorderbutbeforeitcanbesaidtoaffectpublicorder,it must affect the community or the public at large[CASE NUMBER] A mere disturbance of law and order leading to disorder is thus not necessarilysufficientforactionundertheDefenceofIndiaAct butdisturbanceswhichsubvertthepublicorderare[CASE NUMBER]ADistrict Magistrate is entitled to take action under [SECTION] to preventsubversionofpublicorderbutnotinaidofmaintenance oflawandorderunderordinarycircumstances[CASE NUMBER]
Itwillthusappearthatjustas"publicorder"intherulingsof thisCourt (earliercited)wassaidtocomprehend disordersof less gravity than those affecting "security of State", "law and order" also comprehends disorders of less gravity than those affecting "public order"[CASE NUMBER] One has to imagine three concentric circles[CASE NUMBER]Lawandorderrepresentsthelargestcirclewithinwhich is the next circle representing public order and the smallest circlerepresentssecurityofState[CASE NUMBER]Itistheneasytoseethatan actmayaffectlawandorderbutnotpublicorderjustasanact mayaffectpublicorderbutnotsecurityoftheState "
10[CASE NUMBER] InthecaseofDarpanKumarSharmaaliasDharbanKumar [ENTITY][CASE NUMBER]StateofT[CASE NUMBER]N[CASE NUMBER]andothers,reportedinAIR2003SC971, theSupremeCourtmadethefollowingobservations:
"Thebasisuponwhichthepetitionerhasbeendetained inthe instantcaseisthatherobbedoneKumaratthepointofknifea sumofRs[CASE NUMBER]1000/[CASE NUMBER]Anydisorderlybehaviourofapersoninthe public or commission of a criminal offence is bound, to some extent,affectthepeaceprevailinginthelocalityanditmayalso affectlawandorderbutthesameneednotaffectmaintenance ofpublicorder[CASE NUMBER]UnderthedefinitionsintheActitisstatedthat [CASE NUMBER] the case of 'Goonda' the acts prejudicial to public order are 'whenheisengaged,orismakingpreparationsforengaging,in anyofhisactivitiesasagoondawhichaffectadversely,orare likelytoaffectadversely,themaintenanceofpublicorder'[CASE NUMBER]The questionwhetheramanhas onlycommittedabreachoflaw andorderorhasactedinamannerlikelytocausedisturbance ofthepublicorderisaquestionofdegreeandtheextentofthe reachoftheactuponthesociety;thatasolitaryassaultonone individualcanhardlybesaidtodisturbpublicpeaceorplace public order in jeopardy so as to bring the case within the purviewoftheActprovidingforpreventivedetention[CASE NUMBER]"
11[CASE NUMBER] Theterm"habitual"meanscontinualacts[CASE NUMBER]Here,inthepresent case,excepttwooffences,therewasnomaterialbeforethedetaining authoritytorecordasatisfactionthatthepetitionerisahabitualor continuously involved in the offence[CASE NUMBER] In this connection, it will be relevanttorefertooneofthedecisionoftheDivisionBenchofthis CourtinthecaseofStateofGujaratv[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] reportedin 2014LawSuit(Guj)1651,whereininpara8, theCourthasobservedasunder: "8[CASE NUMBER] Theuseofphase'habitually'connotesrepeatedorcontinual acts[CASE NUMBER]LearnedSingleJudgehasconsideredtheword'habitual'as veryrelevantandwealsofindthatunlessapersonisfoundtobe habitually committing or attempting to commit or abets in commission of the offence punishable under [SECTION] of the BombayAnimalPreservationAct,1954,hecannotbesaidtobe Cruel Personas defined inSection2(bbb)oftheAct[CASE NUMBER]Therefore suchdefinitionitselfisnotattractedinthefactsofthecase[CASE NUMBER]The detainingauthority,therefore,couldbesaidtohaveexceededin its authority, power and jurisdiction in making the order of detentionagainstthepetitionerandifsuchbeingthecase,power underArticle226ofthe[ACT]ofIndiacouldverywellbe exercisedagainsttheorderofdetentionatpreexecutionstage[CASE NUMBER]"
11[CASE NUMBER]1[CASE NUMBER] Yet another decision of this Court rendered in [CASE NUMBER] dated 19[CASE NUMBER]12[CASE NUMBER]2013, the Court in para5to8hasobservedasunder:
5[CASE NUMBER] No doubt, neither the possibility of launching of a criminal proceedings nor pendency of any criminal proceedings is an absolutebartoanorderofpreventivedetention[CASE NUMBER]But,failureof [CASE NUMBER] the detaining authority to consider the possibility of either launching or pendency of criminal proceedings may, in the circumstances of a case, lead to the conclusions that the the detainingauthorityhasnotapplieditsmindtothevitalquestion whether it was necessary to make an order of preventive detention[CASE NUMBER]Sincethereisanallegationthattheorderofdetention is issued in a mechanical manner without keeping in mind whether it was necessary to make such an order when an ordinarycriminalproceedingscouldwellservethepurpose[CASE NUMBER]The detainingauthoritymustsatisfythecourtthatthequestiontoo wasborneinmindbeforetheorderofdetentionwasmade[CASE NUMBER]Inthe caseonhand,thedetainingauthorityfailedtosatisfythecourt that the detaining authority so bore the question in mind and, therefore,thecourtisjustifiedindrawingtheinferencethatthere was no application of mind by detaining authority to the vital question whether it was necessary to preventively detain the detenue[CASE NUMBER]ItisalsofruitfultorefertothedecisionoftheHon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of [PRECEDENT] wherein, it is observed by the Hon'ble Apex Courtthatifapersonisliabletobetried,orisactuallybeing triedforacriminaloffencebuttheordinarycriminallawwillnot beabletodealwiththesituation,thenandonlythen,preventive detentionbetakenrecourseto[CASE NUMBER]
6[CASE NUMBER] Having regard to the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner,itwouldbenecessarytorefertothedefinitionof"cruel person"asgiveninSection2(bbb)ofthePASAActwhichrunsas under:
"2(bbb) "cruel person" means a person, who either by himself or as a member or leader of a gang, habitually commitsorattemptstocommitorabetsthecommissionof an offence punishable under [SECTION] of the Bombay AnimalPreservationAct,1954(Bom[CASE NUMBER]LXXXIIof1954)"[CASE NUMBER]
7[CASE NUMBER]Itisclearfromreadingofthedefinitionthatthepersontobe brandedasa"cruelperson"hastobeeitheramemberorleader of a gang habitually committing or attempting to commit or abettingthecommissionofoffencepunishableunderSection8of theBombayAnimalPreservationAct,1954[CASE NUMBER]Theterm"habitually" examinedfromanyangle,literalorlegal,wouldrequirepresence ofanelementofrepetitiveness[CASE NUMBER]Intheinstantcase,barringone offenceregisteredagainstthepetitioner,therewasno material before the detaining authority to record a satisfaction that the petitionerishabitualorrepetitivelyinvolvedintheoffences[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER]
8[CASE NUMBER]Asaresultofhearingandperusaloftherecord,itappearsthat theonlymaterialthatwasavailablewiththedetainingauthority wasonecriminalcaseregisteredagainstthedetenuandonthat basis,itcannotbesaidthattheactivityofthedetenuhasbecome athreattothemaintenanceof'publicorder'and'publichealth'[CASE NUMBER] Mereinvolvementofthedetenuinsuchactivitymaynotamount todangerousactivitybythedetenuandmerementionofthem, unlesssupportedbyanyevidence,cannotbesaidtobematerial germaneforthepurposeofarrivingatthesubjectivesatisfaction thattheactivityofthedetenuisprejudicialtothemaintenanceof 'public order' and 'public health'[CASE NUMBER] In this connection, it will be fruitful to refer to a decision of the Supreme Court in [PRECEDENT] has beenclearlylaiddown[CASE NUMBER]TheCourtobservedasfollows:
"Doestheexpression"publicorder"takeineverykindof infraction of orderoronlysome categories thereof ? It is manifest that every act of assault or injury to specific personsdoesnotleadtopublicdisorder[CASE NUMBER]Whentwopeople quarrelandfightandassaulteachotherinsideahouseor inastreet,it maybesaidthatthereisdisorderbutnot public disorder[CASE NUMBER] Such cases are dealt with under the powers vested in the executive authorities under the provisionsofordinarycriminallawbuttheculpritscannot bedetainedonthegroundthattheyweredisturbingpublic order[CASE NUMBER]Thecontraventionofanylawalwaysaffectsorder butbeforeitcanbesaidtoaffectpublicorder,itmustaffect thecommunityorthepublicatlarge[CASE NUMBER]Inthisconnectionwe must draw a line of demarcation between serious and aggravated forms of disorder which directly affect the communityorinjurethepublicinterestand therelatively minor breaches of peace of a purely local significance which primarily injure specific individuals and only in a secondarysensepublicinterest[CASE NUMBER]Ameredisturbanceoflaw and order leading to disorder is thus not necessarily sufficientforactionunderthePreventiveDetentionActbut adisturbancewhichwillaffectpublicordercomeswithin thescopeoftheAct[CASE NUMBER]"
11[CASE NUMBER]2[CASE NUMBER] Similarly in decision of this Court rendered in [CASE NUMBER] dated 26[CASE NUMBER]04[CASE NUMBER]2017, the Court in para9,10,12and13hasobservedasunder: [CASE NUMBER]
9[CASE NUMBER]Theorderofdetentionispassedonthebasisofwhathascome to be known as the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authoritysuchsubjectivesatisfactionhastobearrivedatontwo points[CASE NUMBER]Firstly,ontheveracityoffactsimputedtothepersontobe detained and secondly, on the prognostication of the detaining authoritythatthepersonconcernedislikelytoindulgeagainin thesamekindofnotoriousactivities[CASE NUMBER]Whereas,normallawsare primarilyconcernedwiththeactofcommissionoftheoffence,the detentionlawsareconcernedwithcharacterofthepersonwho hascommittedorislikelytocommitan offence[CASE NUMBER]Thedetaining authorityhas,therefore,tobesatisfiedthatthepersonsoughtto bedetainedisofsuchatypethathewillcontinuetoviolatethe laws of the land if he is not preventively detained[CASE NUMBER] So, the commission of infraction of law, not done in an organized or systematic manner, may not be sufficient for the detaining authority to justifiably come to the conclusion that there is no alternatebuttopreventivelydetainthepetitioner[CASE NUMBER]
10[CASE NUMBER] No doubt,neither the possibilityof launching of a criminal proceedings nor pendency of any criminal proceedings is an absolutebartoanorderofpreventivedetention[CASE NUMBER]But,failureof the detaining authority to consider the possibility of either launching or pendency of criminal proceedings may, in the circumstances of a case, lead to the conclusions that the the detainingauthorityhasnotapplieditsmindtothevitalquestion whether it was necessary to make an order of preventive detention[CASE NUMBER]Sincethereisanallegationthattheorderofdetention is issued in a mechanical manner without keeping in mind whether it was necessary to make such an order when an ordinarycriminalproceedingscouldwellservethepurpose[CASE NUMBER]The detainingauthoritymustsatisfythecourtthatthequestiontoo wasborneinmindbeforetheorderofdetentionwasmade[CASE NUMBER]Inthe caseonhand,thedetainingauthorityfailedtosatisfythecourt that the detaining authority so bore the question in mind and, therefore,thecourtisjustifiedindrawingtheinferencethatthere wasnonapplicationofmindbydetainingauthoritytothevital question whether it was necessary to preventively detain the detenue[CASE NUMBER]ItisalsofruitfultorefertothedecisionoftheHon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of [PRECEDENT] wherein, it is observed by the Hon'ble Apex Courtthatifapersonisliabletobetried,orisactuallybeing triedforacriminaloffencebuttheordinarycriminallawwillnot beabletodealwiththesituation,thenandonlythen,preventive detentionbetakenrecourseto[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER]
12[CASE NUMBER]Itappearsthatthesubjectivesatisfactionarrivedatbythe detaining authority cannot be said to be legal, valid and in accordance with law inasmuch as the offences alleged in the FIR/scannothaveanybearingonthepublicordersincethelaws ofthelandaresufficientenoughtotakecareofthesituationand that the allegations as have been levelled against the detenue cannot be said to be germane for the purpose of bringing the detenue within the meaning of [SECTION] of the Act and unlessanduntilthematerialistheretomakeoutacasethatthe person concerned has become a threat and a menace to the societysoastodisturbthewholetempoofthesocietyandthat thewholesocialapparatusisinperildisturbingpublicorderat theinstanceofsuchperson[CASE NUMBER]Inviewoftheallegationsallegedin the aforesaid F[CASE NUMBER]I[CASE NUMBER]R/s[CASE NUMBER], the Court is of the opinion that the activitiesofthedetenuecannotbesaidtobedangeroustothe maintenance of public order and at the most fall under the maintenance of "law and order[CASE NUMBER]" In this connection, it will be fruitful to refer to a decision of the Supreme Court in [PRECEDENT] has beenclearlylaiddown[CASE NUMBER]TheCourtobservedasfollows:
"Doestheexpression"publicorder"takeineverykindof infraction of orderoronlysome categories thereof ? It is manifest that every act of assault or injury to specific personsdoesnotleadtopublicdisorder[CASE NUMBER]Whentwopeople quarrelandfightandassaulteachotherinsideahouseor inastreet,it maybe saidthat there isdisorderbut not public disorder[CASE NUMBER] Such cases are dealt with under the powers vested in the executive authorities under the provisionsofordinarycriminallawbuttheculpritscannot bedetainedonthegroundthattheyweredisturbingpublic order[CASE NUMBER]Thecontraventionofanylawalwaysaffectsorder butbeforeitcanbesaidtoaffectpublicorder,itmustaffect thecommunityorthepublicatlarge[CASE NUMBER]Inthisconnectionwe must draw a line of demarcation between serious and aggravated forms of disorder which directly affect the communityorinjurethepublicinterestand therelatively minor breaches of peace of a purely local significance which primarily injure specific individuals and only in a secondarysensepublicinterest[CASE NUMBER]Ameredisturbanceoflaw and order leading to disorder is thus not necessarily sufficientforactionunderthePreventiveDetentionActbut adisturbancewhichwillaffectpublicordercomeswithin thescopeoftheAct[CASE NUMBER]"
[CASE NUMBER]
13[CASE NUMBER]Therefore,itcannotbesaidthatfortheaforesaidoffence/s registered against the petitioner, the petitioner could be consideredtobea"cruelperson",whosepreventivedetentionis must for maintenance of public order[CASE NUMBER] So, the Court is of the consideredopinionthatthepetitionerisnota"cruelperson"and his act, as alleged in the detention order cannot disturb maintenance of public order and, therefore, the instant case wouldfallwithin3rdand4thgroundsnamelyitispassedfor wrong purpose or it is passed on vague, extraneous and irrelevantgroundsmentionedinthecaseofAlkaGadia(supra) and, therefore, order of preventive detention at preexecution stagecallsforinterferenceofthisCourt[CASE NUMBER]Astheorderofdetention has been passed by the detaining authority without having adequate grounds for passing the said order, it cannot be sustainedanddeservestobequashedandsetaside[CASE NUMBER]"
11[CASE NUMBER]3[CASE NUMBER] SameviewisreflectinginthedecisionrenderedinSpecialCivil Application No, 6874 of 2016 dated 05[CASE NUMBER]05[CASE NUMBER]2016 and in [CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER]
12[CASE NUMBER] Thus, from the various decisions of the Apex Court and this Court referred to above, it could easily be said that the detaining authority has failed to substantiate that the alleged antisocial activitiesofthedetenuaffectadverselyorarelikelytoaffectadversely themaintenanceofpublicorder[CASE NUMBER]Itistruethatthereisaverythinline betweenthequestionoflawandordersituationandapublicorder situation,andsometimes,theactsofapersonrelatingtolawand order situation can turn into a question of public order situation[CASE NUMBER] Whatisdecisivefordeterminingtheconnectionofgroundofdetention withthemaintenanceofpublicorder,theobjectofdetention,isnotan intrinsicqualityoftheactbutratheritslatentpotentiality[CASE NUMBER]Therefore, for determining whether the ground of detention is relevant for the purposesofpublicorderornot,merelyanobjectivetestbasedonthe intrinsicqualityofanactwouldnotbeasafeguide[CASE NUMBER]Thepotentialityof the act has to be examined in the light of the surrounding circumstances,posteriorandanterior[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER]
13[CASE NUMBER] Thus,intheoverallviewofthematter,Iamconvincedthatthe detentionofthepetitionerisnotinaccordancewithlawandtheorder ofdetentiondeservestobequashedandsetaside[CASE NUMBER]
14[CASE NUMBER] Inviewofabove,Iaminclinedtoallowthispetition,because simplicitorregistrationofFIR/sbyitselfcannothaveanynexuswith thebreachofmaintenanceofpublicorderandtheauthoritycannot have recourse under the Act and no other relevant and cogent materialexistsforinvokingpowerundersection3(2)oftheAct[CASE NUMBER]Inthe result,thepresentpetitionisherebyallowedandtheimpugnedorder ofdetentionNo[CASE NUMBER]PCB/[CASE NUMBER] by the respondent - detaining authority is hereby quashed and set aside[CASE NUMBER] The detenue is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith if not requiredinanyothercase[CASE NUMBER]
15[CASE NUMBER] Ruleismadeabsoluteaccordingly[CASE NUMBER]Directserviceispermitted[CASE NUMBER]
([ENTITY],J[CASE NUMBER]) /phalguni/