Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vijaybhai @ Kalu S/o Bachubhai Solanki, was preventively detained by the Police Commissioner, Surat, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act, 1985, as a 'dangerous person' as defined under Section 2(c) of the Act. The detention order was dated 09/01/2026. The detenue, through his wife Baluben W/o Vijaybhai, challenged the legality and validity of the order by way of a Special Criminal Application before the High Court of Gujarat. The court heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the respondent-State. The petitioner's advocate argued that there was no material on record to show that public health, public order, or public tranquility was disturbed in any manner, and that the order was passed mechanically without application of mind. It was also submitted that the detenue was currently detained in Central Jail, Ahmedabad. The learned APP opposed the petition, contending that the detenue was a habitual offender and his activities affected society at large, and that the detaining authority had considered his antecedents and past activities. The court, after hearing both sides, found that there was no material to indicate disturbance to public order or public tranquility. The court held that the order was passed mechanically and without application of mind, and therefore quashed and set aside the detention order. The court directed that the detenue be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Dangerous Person - Section 2(c) of Gujarat Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act, 1985 - Lack of Material - The detenue was detained as a dangerous person under the Act. The court held that there was no material available with the detention authority to indicate how public health, public order, or public tranquility was disturbed. The order was passed mechanically and without application of mind. (Paras 1-6) B) Preventive Detention - Validity - Mechanical Order - The court found that the impugned order was passed without application of mind and prima facie mechanically. The mere fact that the detenue was a habitual offender and had antecedents did not justify preventive detention without showing a threat to public order. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the preventive detention order passed under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act, 1985 was valid in the absence of material indicating disturbance to public order or public tranquility.
Final Decision
The court quashed and set aside the detention order dated 09/01/2026 passed by the Police Commissioner, Surat. Directed that the detenue be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Preventive detention requires material to show disturbance to public order
- mere registration of FIRs insufficient
- detention order must be passed with application of mind
