Supreme Court sets aside preventive detention of Madhya Pradesh law student

The Supreme Court on Friday ordered the release of Aniket (petitioner), a 24-year-old law student from Madhya Pradesh, who had been placed under preventive detention for nearly a year under the National Security Act, 1980 (NSA). [Annu @ Aniket through his father as next friend Krupal Singh Thakur vs. Union of India].A Bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and K Vinod Chandran noted that the detention order, which was extended four times, did not meet the statutory requirements under Section 3(2) of the NSA. The Court said the detention was “wholly untenable” and directed Aniket’s immediate release from Central Jail, Bhopal..Aniket was initially detained by an order of July 11, 2024 issued by the District Magistrate, Betul. The detention was extended multiple times and as per the most recent extension, was set to continue until July 12, 2025..Aniket approached the Supreme Court challenging the dismissal of his Habeas Corpus petition by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on February 25.He was arrested after an altercation at a university campus in Betul district on June 14, 2024. According to his petition, the incident began when Aniket objected to the behaviour of a faculty member towards a Scheduled Caste student. A scuffle broke out and an FIR was later lodged against Aniket for attempt to murder and other offences. He surrendered on June 16 and was placed under judicial custody.While in jail, a preventive detention order was issued against him under the NSA. This order was later confirmed by the State government and extended every three months. In his petition, Aniket argued that there was no fresh material to justify continued detention and that the extension orders merely repeated earlier grounds without independent application of mind.He also pointed out that he had not filed for bail in the pending cases and no co-accused had been granted bail either - an essential precondition for ordering preventive detention when the person is already in jail, as per Supreme Court precedents..The State filed a counter affidavit before the apex court citing nine criminal antecedents of the petitioner, including the present FIR, to justify the detention..During the hearing, Aniket’s counsel pointed out that he had already been acquitted in five out of the eight past cases. In one, he was convicted and only fined. The remaining two were pending trial and he had already secured bail. In the case directly related to the detention, he had been granted bail on January 28 this year, it was highlighted..The Court observed that Aniket was in jail solely because of the preventive detention order even though he was not in custody for any pending case.According to the Court, the order failed to disclose why preventive detention was necessary despite Aniket already being in judicial custody. There was no explanation on why existing bail conditions were insufficient or how his release would pose a threat to public order. The detention order had also been issued by the District Magistrate without reference to the State government, and without addressing Aniket’s custodial status in the other cases.The Court held that this omission alone was fatal to the legality of the detention..The Court through a short order directed Aniket's immediate release and said that a detailed order would follow soon. .Aniket was represented by Advocate Animesh Kumar.