MADHUBEN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner-detenue has prayed to quash and set aside the order of detention dated 18.6.2010 passed by the Respondent No.1 ? Commissioner of Police, Surat City, in exercise of powers under Sub Section (2) of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short ?PASA Act?), wherein the lady Petitioner is branded as ?bootlegger?.

(2.) Heard Mr. N.M.Kapadia, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. L.B.Dabhir, learned AGP for the Respondents. Affidavit in reply filed by Respondent No.1 ? Commissioner of Police has been taken into consideration. The Petitioner came to be detained as ?bootlegger? on her involvement in four offences under the Bombay Prohibition Act.

(3.) It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that it is a settled legal position that on registration of four offences, no order of detention could have been passed, as Petitioner ? detenu cannot be branded as ?bootlegger?. It has been further submitted that the activities of the Petitioner cannot be said to be injurious to the public health or public order. It has been further submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that there is gross delay in passing the order of detention as well as there is gross delay in executing the order of detention.