Preventive Detention Can’t Be Invoked For Law And Order Situation: SC
Background
Preventive detention is a legal measure where a person can be detained without trial to prevent them from committing a potential offense.
In India, preventive detention is governed primarily by The National Security Act (NSA), 1980 and other state-specific preventive detention laws.
Historically, preventive detention is not meant for ordinary crimes or routine law-and-order situations; it is intended for matters affecting national security, public order, or prevention of serious offenses.
Some state authorities have, in the past, invoked preventive detention against people involved in protests, strikes, or public disorder situations.
Supreme Court’s Ruling
The Supreme Court clarified that preventive detention cannot be invoked for mere law-and-order situations.
Key points from the judgment:
Preventive Detention vs. Law & Order
Preventive detention is meant to prevent serious threats to national security, public order, or state security, not minor disturbances.
Law-and-order problems, such as riots, protests, or nuisance, do not automatically justify preventive detention.
Principle of Proportionality
Detention must be necessary and proportionate to the risk posed.
Ordinary police powers (arrest under CrPC, Section 151 preventive arrest, etc.) are sufficient to handle law-and-order situations.
Invoking preventive detention in such cases is misuse of law and violates fundamental rights, especially Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty).
Judicial Oversight
Courts have the duty to scrutinize preventive detention orders strictly, ensuring they are not arbitrary or excessive.
Important Case Laws Referenced
A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950)
Early preventive detention case.
Court recognized preventive detention as exceptional power, allowed only to prevent threats to public order or state security.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Expanded the scope of Article 21.
Held that preventive detention cannot be arbitrary or violate principles of natural justice.
P.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1967)
Preventive detention cannot replace normal criminal procedure for minor offenses.
A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988)
Preventive detention cannot be used as a substitute for regular law enforcement.
Recent SC Judgment (2025)
The Court reiterated: preventive detention cannot be invoked for routine law-and-order issues like protests or strikes.
Only in cases of serious threats to public order or national security can such measures be justified.
Supreme Court’s Conclusion
Preventive detention is a measure of last resort, not a tool for ordinary policing.
Authorities cannot invoke it for minor disturbances, protests, or non-violent law-and-order situations.
Misuse of preventive detention violates constitutional rights, and courts can strike down such detention orders.
✅ In short: The Supreme Court clarified that preventive detention is not a tool for routine law-and-order control. It is meant only for serious threats to public order or national security, and ordinary police powers must be used to manage minor disturbances.
RELATED Blog
0 comments