15 June,2023 03:33 PM IST | Mumbai | mid-day online correspondent
Bombay High Court. File Pic
With great power comes great responsibility, the Bombay High Court said while coming down heavily on the district magistrate of Dadra and Nagar Haveli for passing detention orders in a "casual and mechanical" manner and "without application of mind", reported news agency PTI.
According to PTI, a division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Sharmila Deshmukh in an order passed on April 18, a copy of which was made available on Thursday, quashed three orders of November 2022 passed by the magistrate placing three persons under preventive detention.
"With great power comes great responsibility. Thus, greater the power, greater the responsibility," the court said, noting that the detention orders were passed in a very casual and cavalier manner and reflect complete non-application of mind, reported PTI.
While passing detention orders, it is the bounden duty of the authority to act responsibly and with circumspection and in accordance with law, since under the detention law, a person is deprived of his or her personal liberty, the high court said in its order.
The bench noted that the detenues were in custody since November 2022 and this was nothing but "travesty of justice".
The court directed the Union Territory of Daman and Diu to pay a sum of Rs 20,000 as costs to each of the detenue within four weeks and said it hopes and trusts that steps would be taken to conduct a workshop for the officers dealing with detention laws.
The high court passed its order on two petitions challenging orders passed by the district magistrate of Dadra and Nagar Haveli under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act.
One petition was filed by an advocate Vishal Shrimali against whom a detention order was passed and the second was filed by one Sangeeta Rathod challenging the detention orders passed against her son and husband.
Both the petitions claimed that the detenues were social activists who had raised their voice against illegal activities, as a result of which false cases were filed against them. On the basis of these false cases, the detention order was passed, the pleas said.
"We find that the detention orders were passed in a very mechanical and cavalier manner. The case in hand is nothing but an abuse of the law of preventive detention," the HC said while quashing the detention orders.
The bench in its order noted that preventive detention is an anticipatory measure and that the object of the law of preventive detention is not punitive but only preventive.
It is resorted to only when the executive is convinced that detention is warranted to prevent the detenue (person detained) from acting in illegal acts, the high court said.
"Under the detention law, a person's greatest of human freedoms i.e. personal liberty is deprived and hence, it is imperative that the laws of preventive detention are strictly construed, and a meticulous compliance with the procedural safeguard, however technical, is mandatory," it said.
The bench referred to quotes by several authors on liberty being one of the most essential requirements of the modern man and said that courts have always regarded personal liberty as the most precious possession of mankind and have shown no tolerance to illegal detention.
Where personal liberty is concerned, it is not permissible to take a generous view of the lapses and condone the same. In cases of preventive detention, strict adherence/observance of procedural safeguards is mandated, so that liberty of a person is not compromised by arbitrary exercise of power, HC said in its order.
(With inputs from PTI)
