SCA/30314/2007 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 30314 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= MOHAMMAD JAVED @ BHURIYO MOHAMMAD KASAM KANSARA - Petitioner(s) Versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AHMEDABAD CITY & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR RAKESH B.SHARMA for H.S.MULIA for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR HUKAM SINGH, AGP for respondents ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH Date : 06/05/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner-detenue and learned AGP for the respondents. SCA/30314/2007 2/4 JUDGMENT 2. The petitioner-detenue has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting the impugned order of detention dated 19.9.2007 passed by the respondent No.1-Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City, under the provisions of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short, 'PASA') branding the the petitioner as a “Dangerous person”. 3. From the grounds of detention, it appears that one offence has been registered against the petitioner – detenue being CR No.3113/07 at Dani Limda Police Station under Sections 3, 5, 6, and 8 of the Bombay Preservation of Animal Act etc. wherein it is alleged that the petitioner is engaged in the illegal activity of selling mutton by slaughtering cows, etc. The detaining authority has placed reliance on the aforesaid registered offence and statements of unnamed witnesses and after recording the subjective satisfaction about the petitioner being a 'dangerous person' and with a view to preventing him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of 'public order', the impugned order of detention has been passed by the detaining authority. 4. Except few statements of anonymous witnesses, there is no material on record which shows that the petitioner-detenue is carrying on illegal activity of SCA/30314/2007 3/4 JUDGMENT selling mutton by slaughtering cows etc. there is no material on record which shows that the petitioner is acting in such a manner which is dangerous to the 'public order'. There are number of decisions of this Court as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court on the point of relying on the statements of unnamed witnesses in detention cases. In the case of Ashokbhai Jivraj @ Jivabhai Solanki v. Police Commissioner, Surat [(2001 (1) GLH 393)], having considered the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar (AIR 1966 SC 740), this Court held that the cases wherein the detention orders are passed on the basis of the statements of such witnesses fall under the maintenance of 'Law and Order' and not 'Public Order'. In another decision in Special Civil Application No. 14105 of 2004 decided by this Court on 21.2.2005, in the case of Iliyas Mohammad Sindhi v. Commissioner of Police, This Court, relying upon certain decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority has been vitiated. 5. Applying the ratio of the above decisions, it is clear that the ingredients of slaughtering cows etc. and selling mutton and registration of the offences under the relevant sections of IPC were stray and unorganised crimes. It is also clear that before passing an order of detention of a detenue, the detaining authority must come to a definite finding that there is sufficient threat to the 'public order' SCA/30314/2007 4/4 JUDGMENT and it is very clear that the present case would not fall within the category of threat to 'public order'. In that view of the matter, when the order of detention has been passed by the detaining authority without having adequate grounds for passing the impugned order, cannot be sustained and therefore, it deserves to be quashed and set aside. 6. In the result, this Special Civil Application is allowed. The impugned order of detention dated 19.9.2007 passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City, is quashed and set aside and the detenue is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, if his presence is not required in any other case. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. (M.D.Shah, J.) Sreeram.