SAIYED REAFIK SAIYED KADIR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner challenging his detention in pursuance of the order passed against him by the Police Commissioner, Surat City, on 25th June, 2004, in exercise of powers conferred upon him under Section 3(1) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (PASA Act for short). The petitioner is under detention as cruel person from 25th June, 2004 in pursuance of the above order.

(2.) The grounds of detention as placed on record reveal that the detaining authority took into consideration two types of materials to arrive at the subjective satisfaction. Firstly, the detaining authority relied upon registration of two crimes against the petitioner under Sections 8, 9 and 10 of the Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954, first before DCB Police Station on 13th June, 2004 and second before Limbayat Police Station on 4th April, 2004. In first case, it was alleged that the petitioner was found in possession of meat of cows, bulls and calves to the extent of 3200 Kg. The petitioner also found in possession of axes five in numbers, knives six in numbers etc. While in second case, the petitioner was found in dealing with mutton of the animals in breach of the provisions of the Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954. The detaining authority thoroughly and exhaustively examined investigation papers in both the cases and came to the conclusion that the petitioner was cruel person within the meaning of Section 2(bbb) of the PASA Act.

(3.) The detaining authority also relied upon two incamera statements as recorded by the sponsoring authority on 16th June, 2004 and 17th June, 2004 and verified by the detaining authority on 23rd June, 2004. The first witness referred to an incident occurred on 18th April, 2004, the witness was sitting within the area of Limbayat Police Station along with his goods carriage vehicle. At about 7.00 P.M., the petitioner and other persons approached him and stated that they needed goods carriage vehicle of the witness on hire to take the same at village Valan. The witness knew that the petitioner and other persons along with the petitioner were arrested in crime registered against them for transporting mutton of animals in contravention of law and hence, the witness refused to give his vehicle on hire to the petitioner. The petitioner got excited on refusal of the witness and started giving abuses. The witness was caught hold of by the petitioner and his accomplices started beating the witness. The witness raised shouts for help which attracted passerby, vehicle drivers and traders men of the locality and a crowd was gathered there some of them attempted to rescue the witness but the petitioner threatened them and his accomplices rushed towards the crowd with weapons in their hands. To save their own life, people started running helter-skelter. The petitioner and his gang inflicted blows on the vehicle which came in their way, the traffic was disrupted, the shop keepers of the locality closed their business and residents of the locality locked themselves in their houses, the normal life was disturbed and fear and terror was spread in the area. The second witness referred to an incident occurred on 16th May, 2004, the witness was present in a stable owned by him, situated within Limbayat area. At about 12.00 P.M., the petitioner and his accomplices approached the witness and asked the witness to sell aged cows to the petitioner. The witness knew that the petitioner was doing the business of slaughtering animals and selling the meat of such animals in contravention of law. Therefore, the witness refused to sell any animals to the petitioner. On such refusal, the petitioner was excited and started giving abuses to the witness. The witness was caught hold by the petitioner and others started beating the witness with fists and kicks. The witness raised shouts for help which attracted a crowd, and some persons from the crowd dared to rescue the witness, but on the direction of the petitioner, his accomplices rushed towards the crowd with open knives to beat them and due to fear, persons started running helter-skelter. The petitioner and his accomplices damaged the vehicles came in their way. The traffic was disrupted the residents of the locality due to fear locked themselves in their houses, people of the locality felt insecurity because atmosphere of terror and fear was created.