Abstract

In the world’s largest democracy, liberty was intended to be fundamental, not contingent upon circumstances. However, the existence and frequent invocation of preventive detention laws in India present one of the most perplexing paradoxes of its constitutional framework. Preventive detention empowers the state to detain individuals without judicial proceedings, not for their past actions, but for potential future conduct. Initially, this measure was meant to protect our nation and keep things in order. Its vague and subjective rules have made it a tool for punishing people before they even do anything wrong. Over the past decade, India has observed a concerning trend wherein peaceful protestors, student leaders, journalists, and dissenters are increasingly detained under laws such as the National Security Act, 1980 without providing charge sheets, undergoing trials, or subjecting to public scrutiny. This paper delves into the way preventive detention, once envisaged as a necessary evil for exceptional emergencies, has now become a routine instrument for criminalising dissent and restricting civil liberties, thereby posing a grave threat to the very constitutional values it was ostensibly intended to uphold. In a democratic society, dissent is not a criminal offence; rather, it constitutes a legitimate form of civic engagement and expression. It serves as a citizen’s voice, raised not in rebellion but in a spirit of responsibility and accountability. Dissent is essential for preserving the spirit of our Constitution and ensuring that the principles of justice and equality are upheld. The use of preventive detention as a means of suppressing dissent is a cause for concern. This paper aims to analyse the legal framework surrounding preventive detention in India and examine its misuse in criminalising dissent. It will explore how preventive detention is being misused to restrict the freedom of expression and dissent.

Keywords