VISHAL CHAUDHORY Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This habeas corpus petition has been filed by Vishal Chaudhory assailing the order dated 15/5/2012 (Ann.1) passed by the Commissioner of Police, Jaipur directing his detention under sub-Section (1) of Section 3 of the Rajasthan Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 2006 (for short, the "Act of 2006") for a period of one year and also the order dated 20/4/2012 (Ann.5) passed by the State Government whereby, State Government has authorised Commissioner of Police, Jaipur to exercise its powers conferred by sub-Section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act.

(2.) The Commissioner of Police has supplied to the petitioner grounds on which he was detained vide letter dated 17/8/2012 according to which, as many as forty five criminal cases of different nature such as - causing damage to the public property, lurking house trespass, house breaking, outraging modesty of the woman, theft, extortion, voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapon, voluntarily causing grievous hurts by terror, wrongful restrain, voluntarily causing hurts to extort property, mischief, attempt to commit culpable homicide, attempt to murder etc.etc. were registered, starting from 30/8/1998 lastly till 4/4/2012. His matter was laid before the Advisory Board, which was satisfied as to the sufficiency of reasons for detention of the petitioner. The State Government thereupon confirmed the order of detention of petitioner for a period of one year from 15/5/2012 to 15/5/2013.

(3.) Shri Anurag Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the order of detention was passed in a hurried manner on 15/5/2012 and the subsequent order dated 17/5/2012 has been passed only in order to justify the said order. The so-called subjective satisfaction of the Commissioner of Police was vitiated for the reason that he did not deem it necessary to satisfy himself as to how many cases were pending trial against petitioner and in how many of them he was acquitted. Mere number of cases by itself does not justify detention of the petitioner because they were all spread over for a period of fifteen years. No reason was assigned in the detention order as to why till 2012, petitioner was not dealt with either under the provisions of Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or Habitual offenders Act or Gunda Act or the like.