ABDUL RAZAK ABDUL WAHAB SHEIKH versus S.N. SINHA, COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, AHMEDABAD AND ANOTHER

Citation: [1989] 1 S.C.R. 890 · Decided: 03-03-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.C. RAY · Disposal: Case Allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
ABDUL RAZAK ABDUL WAHAB SHEIKH 
v. 
S.N. SINHA, COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, AHMEDABAD 
AND ANOTHER 
B 
MARCH 3, 1989 
[B.C. RAY AND S, RATNAVEL PANDIAN, JJ.] 
·1"' 
j 
Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985-Section 
\a.......:... 
3(2)-Detention order-Whether legal and in accordance with law-
Necessity for the detaining authority to consider all relevant material. 
~---
c 
.;~ 
National Security Act 1980--Section 3-Detention order-Sub-
jective satisfaction of detaining authority based on application of 
-;(_ 
mind-Necessity for making an order of detention-Past history and 
antecedents of detenu-When relevant. 
D 
The Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, Respondent No. J 
therein passed an order of detention dated 23.5.1988 against Abdul Latif 
Abdul Wahab, petitioner's brother under section 3(2) of the Gujarat 
Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act; 1985 and served the same on the 
detenu, while he was in jail, in pursuance of an order of remand made 
~ 
E 
by the Designated Court, Ahmedabad in CR No. 40 00987. The peti-
tioner, detenu's brother challenged the validity of this order on the 
ground, amongst others, that there bas been absolute non-application 
of mind on the part of the detaining nuthority in making the order of 
detention. 
111
F 
The grounds of detention furnished to the detenu, makes mention 
~ 
of three criminal cases viz. Case no. 372/85, Case no. 456/87 and Case 
no: 2/88 pending against the detenu at P .S. Kalupur, out of which case 
no. 372/85 is stated to be pending in Court and the other two pending 
for examination. The detaining authority acting on the basis of the said 
complaints apprehended that detenu's criminal activities will adversely 
G 
affect the public order because the activities, the weapons kept by the 
detenu and his associates cannot except create terror in the State of 
Gujarat. The detaining authority further felt that the detenu though in 
--;. 
jail, there are full possibilities that he may be released on bail in that 
offence. It may he pointed out that in case no. 2/88, the name of the 
detenu does not find place in the FIR. Likewise in case no. 372/85 
H 
aforesaid, detenu's name is not there. 
890 
-I 
Id
.lr· 
ABDUL RAZAK v. S.N. SINHA 
891 
In case no. 456/87, registered on 16.10.87 the detenn was arrested 
the same day. The case related to the seizure of a revolver from the 
person of detenn. The detaining authority while issuing the order of 
detention against the detenn, did not ljt all consider the factthat the 
Designated Court ·declined to grant bail to the detenn by its order .dt. 
May 13, 1988. The detaining authority also was not aware that no 
application for bail by detenn was filed between May 13 to May 23, 1988 
i.e. when the detention order was made. 
The Court in order to decide the various contentions advanced by 
A 
B 
the parties felt it necessary to consider the background as well as the 
various detention orders passed against the detenu. The first in the 
series is an order dt. 11th September, 1984 when the Respondent No. 1 C 
issued to the detenn a notice to show cause why he should not be ex-
terned from the boundaries of Ahmedabad and the surroundings rural 
areas. In 1985 the detenn was arrested n/s 307, 143, 147, 148 & 324, 
I.P .C. CR case no. 37 /85 wherein he was granted bail by the Sessions 
Judge on February 14, 1985. On 24th March 1985, Commr. of Police 
passed an order of detenn's detention. On 6th Jnly 1985 charge-sheet in 
D 
CR Case No. 37 of 1985 was submitted. On 27th September, 1985 
inqniry into the externment proceedings was completed. On Dec. 12, 
1985 the detenu surrendered and was taken into custody. On May 26, 
1986, the detenn was acquitted in that case. The detenu was released 
from the jail on June 2;i, 1986 and as soon as he came out of the jail, an 
order of detention under Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act was 
E 
served on the detenn there and then and he was once again taken into 
cnsto.dy. It may be mentioned in this connection that on Jan. 18, 1986, 
the order of externment of the detenu from Ahmedabad city and rural 
, 
areas of Gandhi Nagar etc. was made when the detenu was in jail. The 
r State Govt. on appeal by the detenn confirmed the order of externment. 
f 
However on August 7, 1986, the Govt. revoked the order of detention, F 
as Advisory Board could not .be constituted. On the same day the State 
Govt. passed the second order of detention under PASA and the same 
was served on
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.