Special Civil Application No. 19758 of 2015. Case: Parvej Vs State of Gujarat and Ors.. High Court of Gujarat (India)
| Case Number | Special Civil Application No. 19758 of 2015 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: S.S. Saiyed, Advocate |
| Judges | S. G. Shah, J. |
| Issue | Constitution of India - Article 226; Gujarat Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act, 1985 - Sections 2(c), 3(2); Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 114, 380 |
| Judgement Date | December 08, 2015 |
| Court | High Court of Gujarat (India) |
Judgment:
S. G. Shah, J.
-
Perused the petition, materials supplied to the detenu, detention order and heard learned counsel for the parties.
-
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of detention 26.10.2015 passed by the respondent authority in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short the Act) by detaining the detenue as a "dangerous person" as defined under Section 2(c) of the Act.
-
Learned advocate for the detenue submits that the order of detention impugned in this petition deserves to be quashed and set aside and the ground that two offences registered against the detenu before the concerned police station vide I-C.R. Nos. 91/2015 and 152/2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 380, 114 etc. of I.P.C., by itself cannot bring the case of the detenue within the purview of definition "dangerous person" under Section 2(c) of the Act. Learned advocate for the detenue further submits that illegal activity carried out as alleged cannot have any nexus or bearing with maintenance of public order and at the most it can be said to be breach of law and order. Further, except registration of FIRs, no other relevant or cogent material is available on record connecting the alleged anti-social activities of the detenue with breach of the public order.
-
Section 2(c) of the Act defines the term "dangerous person" as under:--
"2(c). "dangerous person" means a person, who either by himself or as a member or leader of a gang, habitually commits, or attempts to commit or abets the commission of any of the offences punishable under Chapter XVI or Chapter XV11 of the Indian Penal Code (GLV of 1860) or any of the offences punishable under Chapter V of the Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959)."
-
Learned advocate for the detenue, placing reliance on the decisions reported in the cases of (i) Ranubhai Bhikhabhai Bharwad (Vekaria) v. State of Gujarat reported in 2000(3) GLR 2696; (ii) Ashokbhai Jivraj @Jivabhai Solanki v. Police Commissioner, Surat reported in 2000(1) GLH 393; and (iii) Mustakmiya Jabbarmiya Shaikh v. M.M. Mehta, reported in (1995)3 SCC 237, submitted that the case on hand is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decisions. Learned counsel for the detenue further submits that it is not possible to hold in the facts of the present case that the activities of the detenue with reference to the criminal case/s had affected even tempo of the society, posing a threat to the very existence of the normal and routine life of the people at large or that on the basis of the criminal case/s, the detenue had put the entire social apparatus in...
To continue reading
Request your trial