In Brief
Khaja Bilal Ahmed challenged an order detaining him under the West Bengal (Prevention of Violent Activities) Act. The detaining authority relied on fourteen pending criminal cases as evidence of antecedent criminal history and a rowdy sheet. The Supreme Court held that preventive detention requires a clear causal nexus between past conduct and the probability of future prejudicial activities. Merely citing pending or stale criminal cases without demonstrating how they establish imminent danger is insufficient. The Court noted the appellant had been released on bail after the investigating authority failed to file a charge-sheet within ninety days. The appeal was allowed and the detention order set aside.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.