RAJ KUMAR MITHUMAL GOPLANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order of his detention dated 7th August, 1985 passed under the provisions of the Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980, Annexure TA. The ground of his detention dated 9th August, 1985 are at Annexure B.

(2.) In paragraph 8 of the petition it has been alleged as under: 8. The petitioner submits that the allegation made in paragraph 6 of the grounds of detention is false and he denies the same hereby. The petitioner denies that the names and addresses of the customers were not shown in the bills. The petitioner further denies that the stock of kerosene and the price thereof was writer in such a way that the same could not be read. The petitioner submits that the bills attached from the said shop do rot belong to him. The said bills and the bill books are not the bin books of the petitionerTs shop. The petitioner further submits that he is not supplied with the zerox copies taken as sample bills from his bill books for sale of kerosene as mentioned in paragraph 6 of the grounds of detention. The petitioner submits that as he is not supplied with the zerox copies of the bills mentioned in para 6 of the grounds of detention the petitioner is unable to make any effective representation in respect of the said allegation. His fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India is thus violated, and his continued detention has become illegal. The petitioner submits that the Detaining Authority was bound to supply the zerox copies of the said bills mentioned in paragraph 6 of the grounds of detention along with the grounds of detention and documents supplied to him. The petitioner submits that he does not prepare the bills for the same of kerosene in his shop. One Jaswant Kumar Manjiram Marawadi progresses the bills of his shop whose statements have been recorded on 28.5.1985. TI

(3.) In the affidavit-in-reply of Shri N.R. Vasni, Deputy Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhi-nagar in paragraph 8 it has been stated as under: 8 With reference to para 8 instead of 7, I say that the zerox copy of the bill was duly supplied to the petitioner detenu on 28.8.85 through the Jail Authority. I say that the petitioner has also acknowledged the same. I say that the said fact was brought to the notice of the Detaining Authority when the petitioner had made his re-presentation and immediately thereafter the zerox copies of the bill were supplied to the petitioner. I say that the said copy of bill wag supplied to the detenu before the representation of the petitioner detenu. I say that while supplying the said documents the petitioner was given opportunity for submitting any further representation on this behalf. I say that therefore the contention raised by the petitioner is not well-founded. I further submit that from the materials and the copies of which were duly supplied to the petitioner, it establishes that the petitioner has not shown the names and addresses of the customers in the said bills. I further say that it also establishes that the petitioner has mentioned the stock of kerosene and the price of kerosene in such a way that the same could not be read. I submit that from the materials it establishes that the bills were attached from the petitioners shop. I say that at the time of seizure, the documents were seized from the petitioners shop viz, the bill books, stock register and licence of the petitioner. I say that as per the conditions of the licence, the petitioner is responsible for the management of the said shop and thereby the petitioner is required to see that the bills are required to be issued giving full particulars including the names and addresses of customers and the stock as well as the price of kerosene.