LEHARIBAI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution for a writ in the nature of habeas corpus has been moved by the mother of a detenu called Chaganlal Rathod. He was detained at the Central Prison. Bangalore by an order made by the Commissioner of Police. Bangalore under the provisions of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (Central Act 7 of 1980) called shortly as "the Act"). On 20th August, 1980, after hearing counsel for the petitioner and respondents on the merits of the matter, we quashed the order of detention. We now give our reasons in support of that order.

(2.) For immediate reference, we may set out hereunder the impugned order of detention :

(3.) In order to appreciate these contentions it will be necessary to have regard to the scope and object of the Act. The Act, by S. 3 empowers the authorities specified thereunder to detain any person upon the subjective satisfaction with a view to preventing such person from "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community". Explanation to S. 3 sets out the meaning of the expression "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community." It means :