SUBHASH CHANDRA GOEL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution for writ of habeas corpus can be disposed of by a common judgment. Whereas H. C. Writ Petition No. 23 of 1984 is by Subhash Chandra Goel, H. C. Writ Petition No. 37 of 1984 is by Suresh Chandra Goel. Petitioner in H. C. Writ Petition No. 38 of 1.984 is Bhagwan Das Goel.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to these petitions are that there is a partnership firm in the name and style of M/s. Goel Gas Service which carries on the business of purchasing and selling gas cylinders filled with liquid petroleum gas (LPG) at 6/1 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Agra. Suresh Chadra Goel (petitioner in writ petition no. 37 of 1984), Bhagwan Das Goel (petitioner in writ petition no. 38 of 1984) along with Gulab Chandra Agarwal and Smt. Mamta Rani Goel are the partners of firm M/s. Goel Gas Service. Subhash Chandra Goel (petitioner in writ petition no. 23 of 1984) is the son of Bhagwan Das Goel (petitioner in writ petition no. 38 of 1984).

(3.) IT is thus evident that the satisfaction of the District Magistrate that it was necessary to detain the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community was based on the grounds that the petitioners had committed offences that were punishable under sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and 5/9 of the Indian Explosives Act.