MUDITBHAI HARISHANKARSINGH RAJPUT Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing present petition the petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order of detention dated 30.01.2012 passed, against the petitioner, by the respondent No.1 in exercise of power under subsection (2) of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short "PASA Act"). The detenu is branded as "dangerous person".

(2.) THE detenu came to be detained as "dangerous person" on his involvement in the offences being (i) CR No.I03 of 2012 before "A" Division Police Station, Rajkot and (ii) CR No.I08 of 2012 before Malaviyanagar Police Station.

(3.) EXCEPT the general statement, there is no material on record which shows that the detenue is acting in such a manner which is dangerous to the public order. There are number of decisions of this Court as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court on the point of relying on this point. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of (i) DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPUR v/s. V. LAXMANAN, reported in (2005) 3 SCC 663; (ii) AMANULLA KHAN KUDEATALLA KHAN PATHAN v/s. STATE OF GUJARAT, reported in AIR 1999 SC 2197; and (iii) MUSTAKMIYA JABBARMIYA SHAIKH v/s. M.M. MEHTA, reported in (1995) 3 SCC 237 the Court is of the opinion that the activities of the detenu cannot be said to be dangerous to the maintenance of pubic order. In the case of ASHOKBHAI JIVRAJ @ JIVABHAI SOLANKI v/s. POLICE COMMISSIONER, Surat, reported in 2001 (1) GLH 393, having considered the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Manohar Lohia v/s. State of Bihar, reported in AIR 1966 SC 740, this Court held that the cases wherein the detention order are passed on the basis of the statements of such witness fall under the maintenance of "law and order" and not "public Order".