NARESHKUMAR AMBALAL MODI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-1988-8-17
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on August 04,1988

NARESHKUMAR AMBALAL MODI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

PREM SINGH V. STATE [REFERRED TO]
HEMA RAJ JHUNJHUNWALA V. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
SREENIVAS AGARWAL AND ANR. V. STATE OF U. P. [REFERRED TO]
BHIM SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
KANCHANLAL MANEKLAL CHOKSHI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
DALPATBHAI BHIKHABHAI PATEL VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SURAT [REFERRED TO]
GANESHBHAI GANGABHAI HARIJAN VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BANASKANTHA [REFERRED TO]
PARSHOTTAMBHAI NAVALRAM KHEMANI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

B.S.KAPADIA - (1.)The petitioners in the above two petitions have filed these petitions challenging the legality and validity of the detention orders passed against them with a prayer that writ of Habeas Corpus be issued by setting aside the orders of detention and they be set at liberty forthwith.
(2.)The petitioners are detained pursuant to the detention orders dated 23-2-1988 passed by the Govt. of Gujarat on its being satisfied with respect to the petitioners with a view to preventing them from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodity (edible oil) essential to the community in exercise of the powers under sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 3 of the Prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act 1980 (Act No. 7 of 1980). Both the petitioners were detained in execution of the said orders on 25-2-1988. The petitioners were also supplied with the grounds of detention.
(3.)So far as Nareshkumar Ambalal the petitioner in Special Criminal Application No. 264 of 1988 is concerned it appears from the grounds of detention supplied to him that be is residing at Pethapur and was doing whole-sale business of edible oil by obtaining necessary licence. As per the statement dated 11-9-1987 of said Nareshkumar the said licence was cancelled on 27-3-1987 and at the place where he was doing the business his brother Rajnikant Ambalal Modi was doing the business after obtaining necessary licence in the name of R. Ambalal & Company. In the grounds of detention supplied to the petitioner Nareshkumar it is specifically mentioned that he was not holding any licence.
;


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