Two Bills passed by the West Bengal Assembly on Monday have sparked a debate that goes beyond the state. Together, the West Bengal Public Safety and Control of Anti-social Activities Bill and amendments to the West Bengal Maintenance of Public Order Act transform how the state deals with crime, while reshaping the balance between administrative power and individual liberty.
The state government argues that the law, which allows preventive detention up to 12 months, was needed to tackle organised crime, illegal mining, extortion and other activities that threaten public order. In doing this, West Bengal did not break new ground—Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Gujarat and Maharashtra already have similar laws. The Bengal Bill defines “anti-social activities” in broad terms, covering acts “likely” to disturb public order. It also permits repeated detention if the authorities believe a person may engage in such activities again. Most troubling is the provision that legal representation before the Advisory Board is not a matter of right but of permission. Since the Advisory Board decides whether detention should continue, denying a detainee an effective opportunity to present his or her case weakens a key protection against Executive overreach and raises the risk of arbitrary confinement.
Article 22 of the Constitution permits preventive detention, but only as an exceptional measure. In Ameena Begum vs State of Telangana (2023), the Supreme Court reiterated that preventive detention is not a substitute for ordinary criminal law and cannot be invoked for routine law-and-order problems. In another judgement, the court described such laws as a colonial legacy with a “high potential for abuse and misuse”, stressing the need for strict limits on Executive power.
Critics maintain that stronger policing, faster investigations and better prosecution, rather than wider Executive powers, offer a more durable answer to organised crime. They also argue that the Bill’s broad wording could allow even a first-time offender to be detained if authorities believe they may disturb public order.
The debate, therefore, goes beyond West Bengal. Preventive detention has long been part of Indian law, but its legitimacy rests on one principle: it must remain an exceptional power. Any law that expands Executive authority must be matched by equally strong safeguards. That is the constitutional standard every preventive detention law should meet.
