Bombay High Court: Preventive Detention cannot be easy substitute to deal with ordinary law & order problem

Bombay High Court LAW INSIDER IN

Queency Jain –

Recognizing the Right to Personal Liberty of an individual as one of the most precious rights, the Bombay High Court, while quashing a detention order of the Pune Police Commissioner, has stated that preventive detention law cannot be replaced to deal with ordinary law and order problems.

The Bombay High Court, while hearing the case of Shubham Rajendra Hingade v. State of Maharashtra, has set aside the detention order and also stated that the difference between preventive detention law and ordinary law & order lies not only in the nature and quality of the act, but also the extent and potential of its reach on the society.

The Court observed that two cases were registered against Hingade under Arms Act, Maharashtra Police Act, and Indian Penal code.

The Police claimed Hingade and his associates to be dangerous for mankind and stated that the people from his locality feared to even lodge a complaint against him due to “Fear of counter-attack”.

Subsequently, Hingade was detained on the orders of the Pune Police Commissioner which was duly approved by the State Government on the grounds of maintaining public order.

Advocate Kapil Rathor, appearing on the behalf of Hingade challenged the order and urged the Court to quash the same as it was based on personal animosity and not on the grounds of public order.

Though Advocate JP Yagnik, appearing on behalf of the State stated that the grounds of challenging the order were vague and ambiguous, the Court quashed the order and gave bail to Hingade in both the cases filed against him.

Related Post