Bombay High Court: Detention Orders Under Maharashtra Act Quashed for Lack of Justification

In an important decision, the Bombay High Court has cancelled several detention orders under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981. The court found these orders were issued without proper justification, affecting the personal freedom of the people involved.

The Case and Its Background

The petitions challenged the detention orders issued under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981. The petitioners, led by Vijay Ganesh Bhimewar, argued that their right to personal freedom was being violated without enough reason, as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Orders Issued Without Proper Justification

The court noted that the detention orders were issued in a routine way. The orders were the same across multiple cases, suggesting a lack of individual assessment. The judges, Anil L. Pansare and Siddheshwar S. Thombre, emphasized that detention orders must be based on specific situations, not a one-size-fits-all approach.

"The order of conferment is passed mechanically," the court stated, highlighting the lack of detailed justification for each detention.

Role of the State Government

The court found that the State Government's role in approving these orders was also flawed. The approval orders lacked reasoning and were often signed by officials not high enough in rank to make such important decisions.

Advisory Board's Role

The Advisory Board, which reviews detention orders, was found to have given a one-line opinion supporting the detentions without detailed reasoning. The court stressed that the Board must ensure orders are not passed routinely.

Public Order vs. Law and Order

The court distinguished between 'public order' and 'law and order,' emphasizing that the activities cited in the detention orders did not affect public order at large. The offenses were considered minor and should have been addressed under regular law.

Summary of the Verdict

Ultimately, the court cancelled the detention and confirmation orders, directing the release of Vijay Ganesh Bhimewar and other petitioners unless required in another case. This ruling reinforces the need for careful consideration and justification in matters of preventive detention, ensuring that personal freedoms are not restricted without good reason.

"The orders of detention as also the orders of confirmation in respective petitions stand quashed and set aside."