JIGAR LAGDHIRBHAI JOSHI vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR( — SCR.A/4929/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 14,21,226. Disposed: --38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH on 20th April 2026.
CNR: GJHC240268112026
Filing Number
SCR.A/15487/2026
Filing Date
07-04-2026
Registration No
SCR.A/4929/2026
Registration Date
08-04-2026
Judge
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA , HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Coram
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA , HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Bench Type
DIVISION
Category
3011-DB - DETENTION - PREVENTION OF ANTI-SOCIAL ACTIVITIES ACT, 1985 ( 3011 )
Sub-Category
4-DB - DETENTION - PREVENTION OF ANTI-SOCIAL ACTIVITIES ACT, 1985 - PRO-DETENTION - MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
JUDICIAL
Decision Date
20th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
--38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JIGAR LAGDHIRBHAI JOSHI
Adv. MR AFTABHUSEN ANSARI(
Respondent(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(
POLICE COMMISSIONER
JAIL SUPERINTENDENT
Hearing History
Judge: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA , HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
637 - FRESH MATTERS- PRO DETENTION
194-FOR FINAL HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-04-2026 | 637 - FRESH MATTERS- PRO DETENTION |
| 20-04-2026 | 194-FOR FINAL HEARING |
Orders
Summary: The Gujarat High Court quashed the preventive detention order against Jigar Lagdhirbhai Joshi dated 04.04.2026, finding that the detaining authority failed to establish that his alleged cyber offences and activities adversely affected or were likely to affect the maintenance of public order. The court held that mere disturbance of law and order is insufficient for preventive detention; there must be impact on public order affecting the community at large, and directed his immediate release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Gujarat High Court quashed the preventive detention order against Jigar Lagdhirbhai Joshi dated 04.04.2026, finding that the detaining authority failed to establish that his alleged cyber offences and activities adversely affected or were likely to affect the maintenance of public order. The court held that mere disturbance of law and order is insufficient for preventive detention; there must be impact on public order affecting the community at large, and directed his immediate release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts