SCA/8664/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8664 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================= = ANIL @ ADDU RUPCHAND KESHWANI - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================= Appearance : MR VAIBHAV A VYAS for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR HM MAKWANA, ASSTT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, 3, RULE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. ========================================= = CORAM : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI Date : 19/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of preventive detention SCA/8664/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT dated 29th February, 2008 made by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City in exercise of powers under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (the PASA Act) ordering that the petitioner be detained to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The order was executed on on 10th March, 2008. The petitioner is thus detained under the Act since 10th March, 2008. During the pendency of the petition, on 9th April, 2008, the petitioner has made a representation to the State Government against the order of detention, and had also asked for copies of the statements of certain witnesses. 2. Rule was issued on the petition on 27th June, 2008, however, neither the detaining authority nor the State Government, have filed any counter to the petition. 3. The impugned order is challenged on many grounds; however, the core ground is that there is no material on record for the detaining authority to arrive at the subjective satisfaction that the petitioner was acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. 4. The learned advocate for the petitioner has pointed out that the detention order is based upon a solitary criminal case registered against the petitioner. It is pointed out that in case of a co-accused – Jayesh alias Jaylo son of Dalpatsinh Sisodiya, a detention order of even date had SCA/8664/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT been passed which came to be challenged by him by way of a writ petition before this Court being Special Civil Application No.6137 of 2008. It is pointed out that, in the said case also, the order of detention had been passed on the basis of the very same solitary case, pursuant to which the present order of detention has been passed. It is submitted that vide order dated 22nd August, 2008, this Court has quashed and set aside the order of detention passed in the case of co-accused after assigning elaborate reasons therefor. 5. A perusal of the First Information Report annexed with the grounds of detention shows that the petitioner of Special Civil Application No.6137 of 2008 is a co-accused. A perusal of the order dated 22nd August, 2008 passed in the aforesaid Special Civil Application shows that the said petitioner was also detained on the basis of the same criminal case, as in the present case. This Court is in complete agreement with the reasoning adopted by the Court while quashing and setting aside the order of detention passed in the case of the co-accused. 6. In the circumstances, for the reasons stated by this Court in the case of the co-accused – Jayesh alias Jaylo son of Dalpatsinh Sisodiya rendered on 22nd August, 2008 in Special Civil Application No.6137 of 2008, the impugned detention order cannot be sustained. 7. The petition, therefore, succeeds and is accordingly SCA/8664/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT allowed. The impugned order of detention dated 29th February, 2008 passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City is hereby quashed and set aside and the detenu – Anil alias Addu Rupchand Keshwani is hereby ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. Rule is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted. [HARSHA DEVANI, J.] parmar*