VIKRAMBHAI VAJABHAI MORI Vs. COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

(2.) The present petition is directed against order of detention dated 26.06.2018 passed by the respondent - detaining authority in exercise of powers conferred under section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short "the Act") by detaining the petitioner - detenue as defined under section 2(c) of the Act. 2. 1. The case of the petitioner is that on account of the complaints which are narrated in the impugned order, the petitioner has been detained vide order dated 26.06.2018. Therefore, considering the averments made in the petition, the Court on 10.07.2018 was pleased to admit the petition and thereafter it has come up for final hearing before this Court wherein learned advocate Mr. Umang Vyas has appeared for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr. Venugopal Patel has represented the respondent - State.

(3.) Learned advocate for the detenue submits that the order of detention impugned in this petition deserves to be quashed and set aside on the ground of registration of three offences under Sections 307, 114, 143, 147, 148, 149, 325, 447, 506(2), 323, and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 25(1), 25(1)(a), 25)(1)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959 Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, by itself cannot bring the case of the detenue within the purview of definition under section 2(c) of the Act. Further, learned advocate for the detenue submits that illegal activity likely to be carried out or alleged to have been carried out, as alleged, cannot have any nexus or bearing with the maintenance of public order and at the most, it can be said to be breach of law and order. Further, except statement of witnesses, registration of above FIR/s and Panchnama drawn in pursuance of the investigation, no other relevant and cogent material is on record connecting alleged anti-social activity of the detenue with breach of public order. Learned advocate for the petitioner further submits that it is possible to hold on the basis of the facts of the present case that activity of the detenue with respect to the criminal cases had affected even tempo of the society causing threat to the very existence of normal and routine life of people at large or that on the basis of criminal cases, the detenue had put the entire social apparatus in disorder, making it difficult for whole system to exist as a system governed by rule of law by disturbing public order. It is further contended that the detention is based on three offences and one of which is of October, 2017 and all the three cases are seized by the competent court. No other submissions have been made.