VISHALBHAI RAMESHBHAI JAMBUCHA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, inter alia, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 8.6.2020 passed by the concerned authority in exercise of the powers conferred under the provisions of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1985'), detaining the petitioner-detenue as a 'Dangerous Person', as defined under clause (c) of Section 2 of the Act of 1985.

(2.) The brief facts are to the effect that the offence came to be registered with Talaja Police Station being CR No.11198053200364 for the offences punishable under Sections 333 , 332 , 186 , 504 , 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Section 51(A) of the Disaster Management Act. It is alleged in the First Information Report that one of the three accused named in the First Information Report was not wearing mask and when the police personnel asked him to wear mask, he entered into altercation with the police personnel. Further, the petitioner and other two accused persons attempted to assault the police personnel, however, the police personnel then left the place of the incident. The aforesaid registration of the First Information Report led to passing of the order dated 8.6.2020 by respondent No.2. Hence, the present petition.

(3.) Mr. K.H. Daiya, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the order of detention impugned in the present petition deserves to be quashed and set aside. That respondent No.2 has passed the order of detention dated 8.6.2020 detaining the petitioner as dangerous person on the ground of registration of First Information Report. The registration of the solitary First Information Report, by itself, cannot bring the case of the detenue within the purview of the definition of the term 'dangerous person' as defined in clause (c) of Section 2 , so also the provisions of Section 3 of the Act of 1985. The registration of the solitary First Information Report itself cannot lead to public disorder or even tempo of life of the society. Except registration of the First Information Report, there was no other material available with respondent No.2 whereby it can be inferred that the petitioner is a dangerous person as defined under clause (c) of Section 2 of the Act of 1985, and that his activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. It is submitted that it is a well settled propositions of law that the registration of the solitary offence cannot be a basis to arrive at a subjective satisfaction to the effect that the activities, as alleged, are prejudicial to the public order or lead to disturbance to the public order, for, there has to be a nexus or bearing with the maintenance of public order.