DHARMENDRA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
STATE OF GUJARAT
Click here to view full judgement.
UMESH A TRIVEDI,J. -
(1.) Rule. Shri Utkarsh Sharma, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.
(2.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of preventive detention dated 07.01.2020 made by the Police Commissioner, Surat City in exercise of powers under Sub Section (2) of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Antisocial Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') whereby the petitioner has been detained as a 'dangerous person'.
(3.) This petition was heard on 18.08.2020. Learned advocate for the petitioner, Ms. Gayatriba Jadeja, argued at length referring to the order of preventive detention as also the annexures annexed to it. However, at her request, it was adjourned to 28.08.2020 as she wanted to rely and produce on record certain precedents. She submitted that the Civil Application for draft amendment in the main matter came to be filed on 24.08.2020, however, the Civil Application was neither notified nor papers thereof were tagged with the main petition. On that day, Shri Harshad Prajapati, learned advocate appeared alongwith Ms. Jadeja, learned advocate for the petitioner. Registry was directed to notify the Civil Application alongwith the main matter on 11.09.2020. On that day also, the papers of Civil Application for draft amendment were not tagged with the main petition, and therefore, Registry was again directed to notify the Civil Application alongwith the main matter on 21.09.2020. On 21.09.2020, after hearing Shri Prajapati, learned advocate with Ms. Jadeja, learned advocate for the petitioner, draft amendment came to be allowed and the petitioner was directed to carryout the amendment to the petition. Since by way of draft amendment some more grounds were added to the petition, learned Assistant Government Pleader, Shri Utkarsh Sharma, was directed to get instructions with regard to the grounds added to the petition by way of amendment with a further direction to file affidavit-in-reply, if at all the authority wants to file affidavit-in-reply thereto. The main matter was ordered to be heard on 05.10.2020, after grant of time to the learned Assistant Government Pleader for for filing affidavit-in-reply, if at all the authority wants to file it. Thereafter, the petition was taken up for final hearing on 22.10.2020 and it being part heard matter, it was heard subject to availability of time on different dates after 2:30 p.m. Shri Harshad Prajapati, learned advocate with Ms. Jadeja, learned advocate for the petitioner, raised several grounds to challenge the order of detention passed by the detaining authority.
[3.1] However, since the petition is required to be allowed on the ground of non-supply of translated version in Gujarati language of an order of bail, relied on by the detaining authority, I deem it proper not to burden this judgment with the reasoning on each and every grounds argued for challenging the order of detention. ;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.