HATHIYA DUDHABHAI KHUNTI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following reliefs:

(2.) The challenge is to the order of detention at pre-execution stage that the respondent No.2 - detaining authority viz. the District Magistrate, Porbandar, in exercise of powers under the provisions of Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (for short " the Act") and will detain the petitioner .

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present applicant is falsely implicated in the offence. He has nothing to do with the offence. Learned advocate has submitted that present applicant is a senior citizen and he is having contract of door to door delivery. He has not committed any irregularity as the present applicant has subletted the contract to one Rahul and he has been arrested. It is submitted that there is no any abettment or connivance or collusion with the accused. It is submitted that the alleged key of the godown was with the third party i.e. Manager of the godown and he has misappropriated the material and siphoned away the goods. Even during the transportation whatever shortfall is noticed, the said amount is also recovered during the each trip. It is submitted that the allegation levelled against the present applicant is only that he was in contact with one Asvin and Asvin has siphoned away the stock. It is further submitted that nothing is required to be recovered and discovered from the accused. It is further submitted that as such there is no breach of public order or law and order. It is submitted that the registration of FIR doesn't in any way affect the tempo of the society, causing threat to the very existence of the normal routine life of the people. It is therefore submitted that bases on such material if the order of detention is passed, the same is liable to be interfered with.