MAGANBHAI UKABHAI MAKWANA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BHAVANAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-detenu is detained as per the order dated 18-3-1992 of the District Magistrate of Bhavnagar under the provisions of prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as PBM) The grounds of detention are at Annexure-B to the petition from pages 10 to 18. The alleged activities either by way of Commission or omission have been narrated at length in the grounds of detention and being satisfied, the detaining authority has passed the detention order.

(2.) On behalf of the petitioner L.A. for A. R. Thakkar appearing for Mr. Y. S. Lakhani has urged that the copies of documents supplied along with grounds of detention, some of them, are either wholly illegal or partly illegible. At page 3 paragraph 4 in Ground A the details of these various illegible documents have been given. However, on verification of the papers that are supplied to the detenu, the various number of pages as set out in Ground A were found to be legible. This contention, therefore, cannot be sustained.

(3.) The second ground urged on behalf of the detenu was that he made a representation dated 9/04/1992. It was submitted to the Advisory Board on the date on which the detenu was to be heard by the Advisory Board. The Advisory Board submitted its report on 1-5-1992, but, before that, however, it had forwarded the representation of the detenu to the State Government which came to be considered by the State Government after the receipt of the report inasmuch as the date of consideration of the representation is 4-5-1992. It is also clarified after ascertaining the position from the learned APP that the representation was also considered by the Board independently as was expected of it. The point raised on behalf of the detenu that the representation was considered during the pendency of the reference in view of the aforesaid dates therefore would not survive. The attempt made on behalf of the detenu to get the benefit of the decision of the Supreme Court in K. M. Abdulla Kunhilkand B. Abdul Khander v. Union of India reported in AIR 1991 SC 574 therefore is no longer available to the detenu.