Preventive detention for GST-related allegations was restrained where no detention proposal or recorded satisfaction was shown.

Preventive detention under the Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act was held impermissible on the facts alleged against traders in connection with GST offences. The Court noted that the competent State authority had not placed any detention proposal on record, and the GST Department confirmed that no proposal had been made. In the absence of a recorded proposal and proper factual justification, keeping a detention threat pending was not allowed, and the State Authorities were restrained from resorting to preventive detention in these circumstances.

---

---

Issues: Whether the State Authorities could be permitted to resort to detention under the Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act against the petitioners in connection with alleged GST offences.

Analysis: The complaint against the petitioners arose from alleged offences under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The competent State authority did not place any proposal for detention on record, while the GST Department stated that no proposal to detain the petitioners under the Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act had been made so far. On the facts, the Court found that keeping such a detention threat pending over the petitioners was impermissible and that resort to the stringent preventive detention provision could not be allowed in these circumstances.

Conclusion: The State Authorities were restrained from resorting to detention under the Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act against the petitioners.

Ratio Decidendi: Preventive detention under a stringent security law cannot be permitted against traders on the basis of GST-related allegations unless the competent authority's satisfaction and proposal are properly brought on record and justified on the facts.

---