VIPUL RAMANLAL PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order of detention, dated 8.11.2007 passed against him by the respondent No.2 Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad city in exercise of powers under sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Antisocial Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "the PASA Act").

(2.) The facts of the case stated briefly are that the petitioner is working in Ashima Textiles since last 5 years. His father has received stroke of paralyses and he is bed-ridden and the petitioner is the only person earning for his family. That one Dhaval @ Samir Patel also joined Ashima Textiles and worked there for about four months. Therefore, he became friend of petitioner and thereafter he left the job. That petitioner and his friend Dhaval were going in the car of Dhaval. They were intercepted by the police and stock of IMFL bottles were found from the car but the petitioner was not aware about the same. Thereafter, Dhaval @ Samir Patel and petitioner came to be arrested and the petitioner was released on bail on 4.11.2007. Thereafter, the co-accused Dhaval @ Samir Patel was detained by the order of detention dated 8.11.2007, which was subsequently revoked. It appears that in connection with the said first information report registered against him, an order of detention dated 8.11.2007 has been passed against him, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court at the pre-execution stage. It is the case of the petitioner that, in respect of the offence registered vide Sola High Court Police Station C.R. No.5085/2007, a co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Dhaval @ Samir Patel had been detained under the PASA Act vide order dated 8.11.2007. That the petitioner being a co-accused, he was apprehending that a similar order has been passed against him and therefore, has approached this Court by way of the present petition. According to the petitioner, the order of detention passed against the co-accused has been revoked by the State Government, upon the advice of the Advisory Board. The learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of this Court rendered in Special Civil Application No. 13993/2008 dated 20.1.2009. According to the petitioner, since the order in case of the co-accused has already been revoked by the State Government, no useful purpose would be served by executing the order against the petitioner on the same grounds.

(3.) Pursuant to issuance of Rule, an affidavit-in-reply dated 26.8.2009 came to be filed by the detaining authority wherein it has been alleged that the petitioner has been evading execution of the order of detention and is absconding. It is further stated that the detaining authority, after carefully considering, perusing, examining and applying his mind to all the relevant materials placed before him as well as legal provisions applicable to the same, was subjectively satisfied that the petitioner is a bootlegger as defined under Section 2(c) of the PASA Act and has, therefore, passed the order of detention against the petitioner to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Learned AGP Mr. Patel has relied upon the decision of this Court dated 18.12.2009 rendered in Special Civil Application No. 10782/2009, and contended that the petition is required to be dismissed.