Anilbhai Rajabhai Jain vs State of Gujarat and Others

S.G. Shah, J.—By way of this petition, the detenue has challenged the order of detention dated 06.05.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City under the provisions of sub-Section (1) of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ''PASA Act''). Learned Advocate for the detenue has invited my attention to the order of detention dated 06.05.2013 by which the detenue was arrested and sent to Junagadh Jail. As the grounds of detention one offence has been shown as registered against the detenue which pertains to ''immoral trafficking''.

Learned Advocate has stated that on the basis of aforesaid single offence, the detaining Authority came to the conclusion that the detenue was immoral traffic offender within the meaning of Section 3(1) of the P.A.S.A. Act. It was also stated in the impugned order that as the said activities of the detenue are dangerous and affecting maintenance of ''public order'', order of detention has been passed against him.

1.2 In support of his case, learned Advocate has placed reliance on a decision of this Court in the case of Vahidbhai Saiyadbhai Sheikh Vs. State of Gujarat, wherein at Para-9 it has been held as under: "9. Strikingly, in this case, the authority did not choose even to file prosecution and the question of detenue being released on bail could be considered when prosecution is filed and some material is placed before the detaining authority that the detenue was likely to be released on bail. The detaining authority, in this case, instead has chosen to rely upon an incident and from the said incident, the detaining authority reached to subjective satisfaction that the detenue was likely to continue his activities in future when there was no material at all on record revealing such repeating tendency on the part of the detenue. The order of detention, therefore, is vitiated by vice of non-application of mind."

Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. I have also considered factual and legal aspects emerging from the record of the petition and the rival submissions. In the case on hand, the only material is one offence registered against the detenue which pertains to ''immoral trafficking''. Registration of a solitary offence is not sufficient material to infer a certain habit of the detenue and that on the basis of solitary registered offence it would be far fetching to draw inference that the detenue was likely to commit such crimes again and again. I am, therefore, of the view that the detaining Authority has passed the order of detention without there being any credible or cogent material on record in this behalf. Even, taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case and allegations made against the detenue it can be, at the most, said that there is disturbance of only ''law and order'' and not ''public order''.

2.1 Hence, in view of the above discussion as well as in view of the decision of this Court in the case of "Vahidbhai Saiyadbhai Sheikh" (Supra), this Court is of the opinion that the order of detention deserves to be quashed and set aside.

In the result, this petition is allowed. The order of detention dated 06.05.2013 passed by Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad city is hereby quashed and set aside. The detenue is, therefore, ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required in connection with any other case by the Authority. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.