VINOD KUMAR LALAN RAY Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to issue writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction and order to quash and set aside the order dated 12.11.2013 passed by the respondent No. 2 under the provisions of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (for short "the Act") being arbitrary, illegal, malafide and suffering from non -application of mind and void ab initio. The facts leading to the filing of the present petition are as under:

(2.) IT is further the case of the petitioner that the detaining authority is required to supply the grounds of detention and other materials, which are legible and readable. It is specific case of the petitioner that the documents supplied at page Nos. 31, 33, 35, 37, 39, 631 to 633 are illegible documents and therefore, it would amount to non -communication of the grounds of detention and therefore, continued detention of the petitioner becomes violative of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India. In support of this contention, learned advocate Mr. Prajapati has referred to and rely upon decision rendered in case of Kantilal Mathuradas Dave v. State of Gujarat reported in : 2006(1) GLH 728 and in case of Bhupendra Singh v. Union of India reported in, 1987(2) GLH 77.

(3.) I have hard the submissions of learned advocate Mr. Prajapati for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr. Hajare for the respondent State. I have minutely examined the documents supplied to the petitioner. There is no dispute that the documents at serial Nos. 631 and 632 are not at all legible, whereas other documents supplied to the petitioner at serial No. 31, 33, 35, 37 and 39 are partly illegible documents. Needless to say, it is imperative that the detaining authority has to serve the grounds of detention including all the relevant documents which had been considered in forming the subjective satisfaction by the detaining authority for making the order of detention and referred to in the list of documents accompanying the grounds of detention in order to enable the detenu to make effective representation to the Advisory Board as well as the detaining authority. Therefore, non -supply of legible copies of the documents i.e. aforementioned FIR dated 28.9.2013 renders the order of detention illegal and bad. The failure of the detaining authority to supply legible copies of said document vitiates the detention order as has been held by this Court in case of Kantilal Mathuradas Dave (supra) and Bhupendra Singh (supra) cited by learned advocate Mr. Prajapati for the petitioner at bar. This failure on the part of the detaining authority to supply legible and readable copy of the said relevant document to the detenu for making effective representation before the detaining authority infringed the petitioner's right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India.