Aaftali @ Asgar @ Aso Jakambhai Bhatti Miyana vs District Magistrate

Paresh Upadhyay, J

Challenge in this petition is made to the order passed by the District Magistrate, Morbi, dated 10.03.2021, whereby the petitioner is detained as ‘a

dangerous person’ under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985.

Mr. Raval, learned advocate for the petitioner has taken this Court through the material on record and has submitted that, the petitioner could not be

termed to be a dangerous person. It is submitted that the detaining authority could not have recorded satisfaction to the effect that the petitioner was a

dangerous person within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Act. It is submitted that the impugned order be quashed and set aside.

On the other hand, Mr. Soni, learned Assistant Government Pleader has submitted that, the detaining authority has rightly arrived at the satisfaction

that, the petitioner was a dangerous person and he, being a free man, was creating a serious situation for the public at large and therefore no

interference be made by this Court. It is submitted that even the identification of the accused is also done in accordance with law qua the offence in

question. It is submitted that this petition be dismissed.

Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having considered the material on record, this Court finds that, the impugned

detention order is based on three FIRs dated 23.01.2021, 26.01.2021 and 22.11.2020. This Court has considered the narration in those FIRs. The

narration in the two FIRs being :- (i) C.R.No.11189005210116 of 2021 registered with the Morbi Taluka Police Station, District : Morbi for the

offences punishable under Sections 394, 341, 342, 114, 504 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, dated

23.01.2021 and (ii) C.R.No.11189005210127 of 2021 registered with the Morbi Taluka Police Station, District : Morbi for the offences punishable

under Sections 393, 394, 341, 342, 114 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, dated 26.01.2021 are very serious.

This Court has considered the narration in each of the FIRs, line-by-line. On conjoint consideration thereof, independent of what is recorded by the

detaining authority, this Court also arrives at the conclusion that, a citizen on the road would feel insecure, if the person like the petitioner would pass

by him. The offence in each FIR, more particularly first two FIRs, if is seen by Section Number(s) of IPC, it may not convey the seriousness, but

once the narration in those FIRs are considered, it gives different colour altogether. The satisfaction recorded by the detaining authority, as required

under the Act, in the facts of this case, can not be termed to be erroneous in any manner. Therefore, on facts, no interference is required in the

impugned order. This petition therefore needs to be dismissed. In totality, this Court arrives at the conclusion that, if any interference is made by this

Court, in the facts like this, it would be counter- productive for the safety of the people at large. This petition therefore needs to be dismissed.

For the reasons recorded above, this petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged.