MOHAMMED HUSEIN HAIDERALI SAIYED Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has invoked Article 226 of the Constitution for challenging order dated 16.12.2006 of his detention under sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short, "the Act").

(2.) Learned counsel Mr.Rakesh Sharma, appearing for the petitioner, assailed the impugned order on two grounds, namely, that, out of two cases under the Prohibition Act mentioned in the impugned order, the petitioner was stated to have been released on bail by order dated 9.7.2006 of which copies were not supplied to the petitioner; and that there was no material to substantiate the assumption of grave and widespread danger to public health which could be deemed to be likely to adversely affect public order.

(3.) The impugned order has relied upon two cases registered against the petitioner as C.R.No.1457 of 2006 and C.R.No.5060 of 2006 dated 9.7.2006 and 5.12.2006 respectively in which offences punishable under sections 66-B, 65-E and 81 were alleged. It is stated in the order that the Detaining Authority had considered the complaints in the aforesaid cases as well as panchnama and statements of witnesses as also bail applications and orders made thereon and had come to the conclusion that the petitioner was a "bootlegger" dealing in illicit liquor which caused danger to public health. It is stated that in order to prevent the petitioner from anti-social activities in which he was likely to persist and cause danger to public health, which was also likely to cause economic loss, it was found to be necessary to direct detention of the petitioner as the last resort and in absence of any other remedy.