SURENDRA KANAIYALAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned AGP for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner - detenu has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the order dated 29. 9. 2007 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Rajkot City in exercise of power under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (for short,'the PASA Act') whereby the petitioner has been detained as a "bootlegger". In pursuance of the said impugned order, the petitioner is detained in jail.

(3.) FROM the grounds of detention, it appears that one offence being CR No. 173 of 2007 under Sections 66 (1)B, 65-A,e, 116-B and 81 under the Bombay Prohibition Act was registered with Rajkot Taluka Police Station, Rajkot City, wherein certain quantity of English liquor of different brands were found from the possession of the detenu. On the basis of registration of this case, the detaining authority held that the present detenu was carrying on the activities of selling liquor which is harmful to the health of the public. It is held by the detaining authority that as the detenu is indulged in illegal activities, it is required to restrain him from carrying out further illegal activities, i. e. selling of liquor. The detaining authority has placed reliance on the above registered offence and statements of unnamed witnesses. In the opinion of this Court, the activities of the detenu can, by no stretch of imagination, be said to be disturbing the 'public order. ' It is seen from the grounds that a general statement that has been made by the detaining authority that consuming liquor is injurious to health. In fact, a perusal of the order passed by the detaining authority shows that the grounds which are mentioned in the order are in reference to the situation of 'law and order' and not 'public order'. Therefore, on this ground, the subjective satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority is vitiated on account of non-application of mind and the impugned order, therefore, requires to be quashed and set aside.