PANKAJ KANTILAL KHARWA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE SURAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is filed by the detenu-Pankaj Kantilal Kharwa who is detained by detention order dated 12/03/1993 passed by the Commissioner of Police Surat City on his being satisfied under Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act 1985 (for short PASA ACT) with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in the area falling under the jurisdiction of the Athwa police station of Surat City that it was necessary to make an order detaining him and accordingly the order of detention is passed against the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner was served with the said order on 1 3/03/1993 and on that very day he was also served with grounds of detention. On perusal of the grounds of detention it appears that he is detained on account of his activity as dangerous person. The Detaining Authority has relied on two criminal cases pending against him. One incident took place on 17.10.1991 and hence C.R. 466/1991 for the offences punishable under Sections 323 324 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and for the offences under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act was registered against him. He was arrested on 10.10.1991 and thereafter the charge-sheet was filed against him on 16.12.1991 and that is pending for trial. The second incident took place on 3.7.1992 and on account of that incident C.R. No.264/ 1992 is registered against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 323 327 A27 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code as well as for the offence under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. In addition to the aforesaid materials there are also statements of four witnesses recorded by the police on 27/09/1992 24/11/199 2/12/1992 and on 13/02/1993. The first statement of the witness is in respect of the incident which took place on 27/09/1992 the second statement is in respect of the incident which took place on 24/11/1992; the third statement is in respect of the incident which took place on 4/12/1992 and the fourth statement is in respect of the incident which took place on 1 3/02/1993. The aforesaid statements have been verified by the Superior Officer namely the Superintendent of Police D Division Surat City on 7/03/1993 9 March 1993 10/03/1993 and the last also on 10/03/1993 respectively.

(3.) The Detaining Authority. namely the Commissioner of Police Surat City has also considered the availability of less drastic remedy by considering that procedure under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code were taken against the petitioner which is pending and that action under Section 57 of the Bombay Police Act cannot be taken and that action under Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act could not be taken while his detention was immediately necessary with a view to preventing him from the activities disturbing the public order. After considering the aforesaid materials the Detaining Authority was satisfied that he was Dangerous person within the meaning of the definition of Section 2(c) of the PASA Act and that his activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and that with a view to preventing him from continuing such activities it was necessary to detain him.