Skip to main content

Preventive detention only to prevent public disorder; Cannot be invoked over apprehension of breach of law and order: Supreme Court

Preventive detention only to prevent public disorder; Cannot be invoked over apprehension of breach of law and order: Supreme Court

By - Mayur Jain*

The Supreme Court in a recent judgment while quashing a preventive detention order held that preventive detention cannot be treated as a substitute for the ordinary law and “absolve the investigating authorities of their normal functions of investigating crimes which the detenu may have committed”.

The detenu had done fraud and had committed white-collar crimes by offering the complainant advice to invest money in newly upcoming companies and insisted him to invest money. The complainant had also contended that the detenu had cheated many people by collecting more than Rs. 50 lakhs through various payment methods in the guise of providing more profit.

According to the contentions of the complainant, 5 FIRs had been filed against the detenu, all the said FIRs being under Sections 420, 406 and 506 of the IPC. High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad, passed the detention order under section 3(2) of the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act.

Also Read - Delay in compassionate appointment by government causing more grief to the family is unjustifiable: Bombay High Court.

Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Telangana raised contentions that the detention order was totally a correct course of action as the detenu was a habitual offender and would definitely hamper the public order and commit similar offences in future. Ranjit Kumar submitted that “there is no doubt that he had infringed ‘public order’ as defined by the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act and had disturbed the even tempo of life of persons who were cheated by him and were likely to be cheated by him it was important to preventively detain him.”

Shri Gaurav Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner raised submitted against the detention order that, “there is no proximate or live connection between the acts complained of and the date of the Detention Order, as the last act that was complained of, which is discernible from the first 3 FIRs was not in accordance with the date of the Detention Order.” He also added that the detention order was totally perverse.

Also Read - Doctrine of 'No Work Should Go Unpaid' to be applied to all doctors operating under AYUSH and CHS: Supreme Court.

“…it is clear that at the highest, a possible apprehension of breach of law and order can be said to be made out if it is apprehended that the Detenu, if set free, will continue to cheat gullible persons. This may be a good ground to appeal against the bail orders granted and/or to cancel bail but certainly cannot provide the springboard to move under a preventive detention statute,” the bench held. 

CLICK HERE TO READ JUDGMENT.

*Mayur Jain is a 5th year student pursuing B.A.LL.B. from Amity Law School Delhi.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Patna High Court Declares Bihar’s Reservation Amendments Ultra Vires

  In a landmark decision, the Patna High Court has invalidated the Bihar government's legislative attempt to increase reservations for backward classes. The court's ruling focused on procedural flaws and the absence of a robust empirical basis for the hike, sparking a debate on judicial intervention in affirmative action policies. Background and Rationale Behind Setting Aside Bihar Reservation Increase Law The Bihar government had proposed an increase in reservations to address socio-economic disparities faced by backward classes. However, the court found that the state failed to follow due process, which includes conducting a thorough empirical study to justify the policy change. This procedural oversight led to the court's decision to strike down the increase. The High Court emphasized the necessity of a data-driven approach for policy changes related to reservations. The ruling underscored that without solid empirical evidence, such policies could not be justified within...
Post a Comment
Read more

Pune Porsche Crash: Father of Minor Granted Bail

Image Credit: tv9marathi A Pune court has granted bail to the minor’s father, Vishal Agarwal, who faced charges under the Juvenile Justice Act for neglect and endangering the child by allowing him to drive without a license and consume alcohol. Additionally, bar owners and managers were arrested for serving alcohol to minors. The father, already in custody for other related charges, was implicated in the alleged manipulation of his son’s blood samples and in a separate case of kidnapping his driver. Advocate Prashant Patil argued that Vishal Agarwal's arrest was unlawful, contending that the charges were non-cognizable offenses and required a notice under the Criminal Procedure Code. Mr. Patil also highlighted contradictions in police reports, where the minor was listed as the accused in one FIR and as a victim in another.  Also Read:  Delhi High Court Stays Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's Bail in Excise Policy Case Earlier Proceedings in the Pune Porsche Crash Inc...
Post a Comment
Read more

Counsel's failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review: Bombay High Court

By - Sameeksha Negi* The Bombay High Court has observed that “If Counsel has not urged a point, the fact that there were written submissions is immaterial if those written submissions were never in fact argued.” The Bench also added that “Counsel’s failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review or, I dare say, even appeal. It is no ground to assail any order of any judge of any court.”   The bench was hearing a review petition filed for seeking reinstatement of original arbitration petition on grounds some of which were never argued and others never pleaded and the said petition was filed after the original arbitration petition was fully argued, and then decided by pronouncement in open court. Also Read - The Pension Scheme for freedom fighters cannot be construed in a manner that the requirements prescribed are rendered a dead letter: Bombay HC According to Justice GS Patel allowing parties to take grounds in review pleas or in appeals that were not argued initi...
Post a Comment
Read more