Mathew, J. - (1.) The petitioner challenges the validity of an order of detention passed under S. 3 (3) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971, by the District Magistrate, Saran, on 10-6-1974 and prays for issue of a writ of habeas corpus.
(2.) The ground of detention served on the Petitioner on 15-6-1974 states: "On a surprise inspection by the District Supply Officer, Chapra, on 10-6-1974, it was found that he had hoarded and concealed the following stock of essential commodities in his shop: (1) Match boxes sankh brand - 7 bundles - 15 dozen - (one bundle - 60 dozen) (2) Match boxes Tank brand - 2 bundles - 32 dozen. (3) Match boxes Sanpagam flower -52 dozen (4) Match boxes Delux - 2 dozen (5) Soap - 501 brand - 33 (1/2 bars) (6) Soap - Nirmal - 3 (1/2 bars) In addition, the following stock was also found hidden under chauki in his residential house separate from the business premises: (1) Match boxes - 65 gross (9360 pieces) (2) Ashoka Soap - 5 cartons (360 pieces) All these articles were unaccounted for. He did not display the stock and kept it concealed. When some customers, namely, Dhrubdeo Kumar, Sri Madan Kumar and Rajendra Singh wanted to buy match boxes, and soap earlier on 10-6-1974, the dealer refused to sell to them saying that he has no stock. Thus at a time when soap and match boxes have become acute scarce, this dealer tried to conceal and hoard the stock of these commodities with the obvious intention of black marketing and profiteering and creating further artificial scarcity of these articles in the market."
(3.) Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since there was no law fixing the limit up to which a dealer could stock match boxes and soaps, it could not be said that the petitioner had hoarded the scheduled commodities in question and therefore, the ground of detention was bad.;