Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sahil @ Sultan Prakashbhai Solanki, through his brother Vivek Prakashbhai Solanki, filed a Special Criminal Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the Gujarat High Court challenging a detention order dated 24.01.2026 passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad under Section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (PASA Act). The petitioner was detained in Rajkot Jail pursuant to the order. The petitioner contended that there was no material before the detaining authority to indicate that his activities disturbed public health, public order, or public tranquility, and that the order was passed mechanically without application of mind. The State, represented by the learned APP, opposed the petition, arguing that the detenue was a habitual offender whose activities affected society at large, and that the authority had considered his antecedents and past activities to prevent him from acting prejudicially to public order in Ahmedabad. The court, after hearing both sides, identified the core issue as whether the detention order was valid. The court noted that the detaining authority had not placed any credible material to show how the detenue's actions disturbed public order or public health. The court held that the subjective satisfaction of the authority must be based on tangible material, and in its absence, the order was unsustainable. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the detention order and directed the release of the detenue forthwith.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Public Order - Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985, Section 3(2) - Validity of Detention Order - The petitioner challenged the detention order dated 24.01.2026 passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad under Section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985. The court held that in the absence of any material indicating disturbance to public health, public order, or public tranquility, the detention order could not be sustained. The order was passed mechanically without application of mind. (Paras 1-6) B) Preventive Detention - Subjective Satisfaction - Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985, Section 3(2) - Requirement of Credible Material - The detaining authority must have credible material to form subjective satisfaction that the detenue's activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Mere registration of an FIR or past antecedents without nexus to public order is insufficient. The court found that the authority failed to provide any material showing how the detenue's acts disturbed public order. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the detention order under Section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 was valid when there was no material to show that the detenue's activities disturbed public order or public health.
Final Decision
The court quashed and set aside the detention order dated 24.01.2026 passed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad under Section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985, and directed the release of the detenue forthwith.
Law Points
- Preventive detention
- Public order vs. law and order
- Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act
- 1985
- Section 3(2)
- Lack of material
- Mechanical exercise of power
