HRISHI @ SARJERAO BABAN TAKELE Vs. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
LAWS(BOM)-2017-6-320
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on June 14,2017

Hrishi @ Sarjerao Baban Takele Appellant
VERSUS
The District Magistrate Respondents

JUDGEMENT

V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. - (1.) Heard both sides.
(2.) The Petitioner/Detenu Hrishi @ Sarjerao Baban Takele has preferred this Petition questioning the preventive detention order passed against him on 27.12.2016 by the Respondent No. 1-District Magistrate, Sangli. The said detention order has been passed under the the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug offenders, Dangerous persons and Video Pirates act, 1981. (hereinafter referred to as 'MPDA Act'). The said detention order has been issued as the Detenu is a Dangerous person whose activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The detention order is based on one C.R i.e. C.R. No. 36 of 2016 of Bhilwadi Police Station, Sangli and two in-camera statements of Witnesses 'A' and 'B'.
(3.) Though a number of grounds have been raised in the present petition whereby the detention order has been assailed, however, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner/Detenu has pressed only two grounds before us, i.e. ground Nos. 5(d) and 5(i). In ground 5(d), it is stated that in C.R. No. 36 of 2016, the Detenu was granted bail by the Court and he was free person, however, the bail application and the bail order, which are vital documents were not placed before the Detaining Authority nor copies thereof were furnished to the Detenu. In such a case, subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority is vitiated and the detenu is deprived of making an effective representation against the order of detention. Hence, the detention order is liable to be quashed and set aside.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.