SHANTABEN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has been detained as per order of Preventive Deten- tion dated 22/06/1988 passed under the provisions of Section 2 (2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act 1985 (for short the Act). The petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of her detention by filing this petition.

(2.) The grounds of detention disclose that there were about 24 cases under the provisions of Bombay Prohibition Act against the petitioner-detenu. The petitioner was involved in all these cases and the quantity of contraband liquor seized by the police in all these cases ranged from 5 litres to 80 litres. The grounds of detention also disclose that on 10/06/1988 when one person was passing through the locality in which the petitioner was carrying on her activities as bootlegger that is to say storing and selling of contraband liquor in public places he was called and asked to lift a bag But that per- son refused to do so and thereupon he was abused and beaten. On account of this incident there was chaos in the locality and the orderly life was distur- bed. Another person has in his statement supported the say of the person who was asked to lift the bag. It is also stated in the grounds of detention that on 13/06/1988 a girl aged about 20 was teased and molested by people who had consumed liquor from the adda of the petitioner This inci- dent is also supported by another witness. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the aforesaid four cases have been included in Annexure I which is the list of cases pending against the petitioner-detenu. It is also stated in the grounds of detention that all the

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the grounds of deten- tion the detaining authority has mentioned that 24 cases under the provisions of Bombay Prohibition Act 1989 instituted against the petitioner are pending while as a matter of fact in four cases the petitioner has been acquitted. The details of four cases in which the petitioner has been acquitted are as follows:- <frm> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sr. CR No. Date of Court Date of Sr CR No. Date of Court Date of No. offence case No. acquittal No. offence case No. acquittal ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 III 183/85 3. 964/85 66 65 4 2365 20 66 65 23 712 29 81 2 740 4 100 66 65 29 3864 31 66 (B) 23-1-86 223/87 29-7-87 65 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- </frm> 24 cases are pending against the petitioner. In view of this position it is submited that the detaining authority has not applied his mind to the fact that petitioner has been acquitted in four cases and hence the satisfaction arrived at by him is vitiated and the order of detention should be quashed and set aside.