ASHOK CHIMANLAL MODY Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-1988-10-7
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on October 11,1988

ASHOK CHIMANLAL MODY Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MOTI LAL JAIN VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

B.S.KAPADIA - (1.)The present petition is filed by the petitioner Ashok Chimanlal Mody who is the brother of detenu Bharat Chimanlal Mody challenging the detention order passed against the detenu by the Commissioner of Police Surat on 8-4-1988 on his being satisfied that with a view to preventing the detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in the area of Nanpura falling under the jurisdiction of Athwa Line Police Station of Surat City it was necessary to make an order directing him to be detained. The detenu was served with the detention order as also grounds of detention.
(2.)On perusal of the ground it appears that during the period from 1981 to 1988 there are nearly about 10 cases under the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act filed against him the details of which are shown in Annexure A to the grounds. On reading the said Annexure A it appears that the detenu was involved in the offences under Secs. 66(1)(b) 65 and 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act. Looking to the number of bottles of liquor seized from the detenus possession it appears that he was dealing in Indian made English liquor in the names of Brandy Whisky Beer etc. Statements of four witnesses whose names and addresses are also mentioned were relied on by the detaining authority. On the basis of the aforesaid material the detaining authority was subjectively satisfied that the detenu was required to be detained under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act 1985
(3.)In this petition various grounds have been raised challenging the said detention order passed against the detenu. However Shri S. H. Sanjanwala the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner has pressed before us only one ground that the detenu was not supplied with the detailed addresses of the witnesses whose statements are recorded and subsequently relied on by the detaining authority and therefore no adequate opportunity is given to the detenu for making effective representation and therefore his fundamental right under Art. 22(5) of the Constitution of India is violated and on that ground alone the continued detention of the detenu is illegal.
;


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