MANUSING B THAKORE Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AHMEDABAD
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Manusing B Thakore
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AHMEDABAD
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)he present petition is filed by the detenu against the order of detention passed against him on 13/06/1987 by the Commissioner of Police Ahmedabad under Sec. 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act 1985 on his being satisfied that with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order it is necessary to make an order directing that the present petitioner should be detained. The said order was executed on the same day and he was also supplied with the grounds of detention Annexure C to the petition on 16th of June 1987
(2.)On perusal of the grounds it appears that there are six cases filed against him under Prohibition Act and there were cases under Secs. 66B and 65E. The case No. 628 of 1985 was pending the trial and others were under investigation. Accordingly the detaining authority was satisfied that the present petitioner was a bootlegger. He also relied on the statements of certain persons recorded by him on 13/05/1987 and he was also satisfied that the petitioners activities as bootlegger were such as to disturb the public order. He also considered the other relevant circumstances for arriving at the subjective satisfaction that it was necessary to pass the detention order against the present petitioner and accordingly he passed the impugned order of detention.
(3.)In this petition various grounds were raised but at the time of argument Mr. H. L. Patel learned Advocate for the petitioner pressed only one point. The said point is that the detaining authority has failed to discharge his statutory obligation under Sec. 3(3) of the PASA Act to forthwith report the fact of detention alongwith the grounds of under and other relevant papers to the State Government and according to his submission in paragraph 13 of the petition the continued detention is bad in law. The detaining authority has filed counter affidavit and while dealing with this point raised in paragraph 13 of the petition he only stated that this aspect is already dealt with in the beginning paragraphs and the Court may permit him to refer so and rely upon the same. On perusal of the earlier paragraphs and particularly paragraph 3 thereof it is clear that the grounds of detention were served on the petitioner detenu in Sabarmati Prison on 16/06/1987 Thereafter it is stated on oath by the detaining authority that the report which is required to be sent to the State Government alongwith the grounds of detention and other materials which have bearing on the impugned order of detention was sent to the State Government on 16/06/1987 i.e. within the stipulated period of seven days and the State Government in its turn approved the same by an order dated 17/06/1987 However at the time of hearing Mr. Divetia learned Addl. Public Prosecutor stated that in fact the fact of intimation was reported to the State Government by the letter dated 13/05/1987 and therefore there is proper compliance with the statutory requirement under Sec. 3(3) of the PASA Act
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.