Quashed

Salim S-O Maheboob Shaikh v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC2 Jul 2014SCA/4831/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad, allowed a special civil application challenging a detention order under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act. The court held that the definition of a 'cruel person' requires habitual involvement, which was absent as the detainee faced only one registered offence. Consequently, the detention order was quashed.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; detention order dated 21/01/2014 quashed and set aside; detenu set at liberty forthwith.

Salim S-O Maheboob Shaikh Vs State of Gujarat — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gujarat HC (2014)

¶1

C/SCA/4831/2014 JUDGMENT

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4831 of 2014

¶4

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

¶5

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.SHAH

¶6

================================================================

¶7

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

¶8

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

¶9

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?

¶10

4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?

¶11

5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?

¶12

================================================================

¶13

SALIM S-O MAHEBOOB SHAIKH....Petitioner(s)

¶14

Versus

¶15

STATE OF GUJARAT & 2....Respondent(s)

¶16

================================================================

¶17

Appearance:

¶18

MR ATIT THAKOR FOR MS BANNA S DUTTA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1

¶19

MS JIRGA JHAVERI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 3

¶20

================================================================

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.SHAH

¶22

Date : 02/07/2014 ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

By way of this petition, the detenu has
challenged the order of detention dated
21/01/2014 passed by respondent No.2 herein under

¶24

Page 1 of 4

¶25

C/SCA/4831/2014 JUDGMENT

¶26

the provisions of sub-sec(2) of Section 3 of the
Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act,
1985 (hereinafter referred to as “PASA Act”).

¶27

2 Learned advocate, Mr.Thakor appearing for the
petitioner-detenu has invited my attention to the
order of detention dated 21/1/2014, by which, the
detenu was arrested and sent to Rajkot Jail. The
ground of detaining the accused is that one
offence was registered against the petitioner
under the provisions of Sections 5, 6, 8 and 10
of Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1954;
Section 11-E, L of the Bombay Cattle Prohibition
Act, 1960 and Section 119 of the GP Act. He is,
therefore, a “cruel person” as defined under
Section 2(bbb) of the PASA Act. Learned advocate
appearing for the petitioner has submitted that,
except this solitary offence, there is no
material with the detaining authority to detain
the petitioner under the provisions of the PASA
Act. It is submitted that the order is vitiated
because only on the basis of one offence
registered against the petitioner, and in absence
of any other material to show involvement of the
petitioner in similar activities, the detaining
authority has recorded a subjective satisfaction
that the petitioner is a cruel person. The
definition of cruel person requires habitual
involvement and, therefore, the subjective
satisfaction and the consequential order are

¶28

Page 2 of 4

¶29

C/SCA/4831/2014 JUDGMENT

¶30

vitiated.

¶31

3 Learned AGP appearing for the State has opposed
this petition.

¶32

4 Having regard to the contentions raised on
behalf of the petitioner, it would be necessary
to refer to the definition of “cruel person” as
given in Section 2(bbb) of the Gujarat Prevention
of Antisocial Activities Act, 1985, which runs as
under:-

¶33

“2(bbb) “cruel person” means a person who either
by himself or as member or leader of a gang
habitually commits or attempts to commit abets
the commission of an offence punishable under
Section 8 of the Bombay Animal Preservation Act,
1954 (Bom.LXXII of 1954)”.

¶34

5 It is clear from reading of the definition that
the person to be branded as a cruel person has to
be either a member or leader of a gang habitually
committing or attempting to commit or abetting
the commission of offence punishable under
Section 8 of the Bombay Animal Preservation Act,
1954. The term “habitually” examined from any
angle, literal or legal, would require presence
of an element of repetitiveness. In the instant
case, barring one offence registered against the
petitioner, there was no material before the
detaining authority to record a satisfaction that
the petitioner is habitual or repetitively
involved in the offence.

¶35

Page 3 of 4

¶36

C/SCA/4831/2014 JUDGMENT

¶37

6 Under the circumstances, the subjective
satisfaction that the petitioner is a cruel
person on the basis of which he has been detained
is vitiated.

¶38

7 In view of the above facts and circumstances of
the case, the petition is allowed. The impugned
order of detention dated 21/01/2014 passed by
respondent No.2 herein is hereby quashed and set
aside. The detenu is ordered to be set at liberty
forthwith if he is not required to be detained in
connection with any other case. Rule is made
absolute accordingly. Direct Service is
permitted.

¶39

(S.G.SHAH, J.)

¶40

binoy

¶41

Page 4 of 4

Salim S-O Maheboob Shaikh v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salim S-O Maheboob Shaikh v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indrajitsinh Merubha Zala Vs District Magistrate

Kishanbhai Kadvabhai Udhrejiya Vs State of Gujarat

Rajesh Umedbhai Machhi (Detenue) Vs State of Gujarat

Devendra Sinh Ghanshyam Sinh Gohil Vs Commissioner of Police - Ahmedabad City

Liyakatkhan Zarifkhan Pathan Vs State of Gujarat

Ajay S/of Abhimanyu Bagle Vs State of Gujarat