VIJAYBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the petition through his father challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 21.3.2020 passed by the respondent No.2 Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, detaining the petitioner in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as PASA ).

(2.) It appears from the impugned order of detention that the petitioner was involved in two cases namely FIR being I-CR No.86/2019 registered at the Satellite Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 379 and 114 of IPC and the FIR being I-CR No.11196022200118/2020, registered at Isanpur Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 307, 323 and 120B of IPC and Section 135 of Gujarat Police Act. The detaining authority respondent No.1 after considering the papers of investigation in the said FIRs and also the statements of the witnesses recorded in camera, whose identity was not disclosed, came to the conclusion that the petitioner was a dangerous person within the meaning of Section 2(C) of the said Act and his activities were likely to affect the maintenance of public order.

(3.) It is sought to be submitted by the learned Advocate Ms.Subhadra Patel for the petitioner that the impugned order passed by the respondent No.2 is without application of mind and arbitrary, inasmuch as out of the two cases registered against the petitioner, one case pertained to the offence against an individual and in the other case, the petitioner was not named in the FIR, and therefore, it could not be said that the petitioner was habitual in committing the offences, or was a dangerous person. She has placed heavy reliance on the judgements of Supreme Court in case of Mustakmiya Jabbarmiya Shaikh Vs. M. M. Mehta, Commissioner of Police and Ors. , 1995 3 SCC 237 and in case of Pushkar Mukherjee and Ors. versus The State Of West Bengal, 1970 AIR 852 to submit that maintenance of public order was different from law and order and that in case of offence against an individual, public order could not be said to have been disturbed. Ms.Patel has relied upon the unreported decision of the Division Bench of this Court in case of Vijay @ Ballu Bharatbhai Ramanbhai Patni Vs. State of Gujarat (In LPA No.454 of 2020 dt. 31.8.2020).