The Bombay High Court recently canceled several detention orders under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981. The court found that the orders were issued without proper reasoning.
The petitions challenged detention orders under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981. The orders aimed to prevent individuals like Ishwar from causing trouble in public. However, Ishwar argued that these orders were issued without proper reasoning.
The case was heard by Justices Anil L. Pansare and Siddheshwar S. Thombre. They noted that the detention, approval, and confirmation orders lacked individual assessment. The judges emphasized that personal freedom should only be limited with strong legal reasoning.
"Taking away someone's personal freedom must follow a legally prescribed process."
The court found that the orders were the same across different cases, showing a lack of individual consideration. The State Government had issued a general order affecting all districts in Maharashtra without specifying unique circumstances for each area.
The judges highlighted the importance of following the correct steps, as required by law. They criticized the use of the same language in the orders and emphasized the need for specific reasons for each detention.
"Such an order is a classic example of what can be termed as a thoughtless way to assess the situation."
The court also looked into the role of the Advisory Board, which is supposed to independently review detention orders. The board's opinion was often just a formality, lacking detailed reasoning.
The court canceled the detention and confirmation orders, stating they did not meet legal standards. Ishwar was ordered to be released unless required in other cases.
The court decided to cancel the detention orders because they were issued without proper reasoning and did not follow the necessary legal steps. Ishwar was to be released unless he was needed for other legal matters.
