SANTOSH TUKARAM CHAVAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This letter petition is received through jail. It challenges the order of detention passed against the petitioner under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Detaining Authority after considering the material placed before it recorded his subjective satisfaction that the petitioner is a dangerous person as defined in Section 2(b1) of the Act, as he had unleashed a reign of terror and has become a perpetual danger to the Society at large in the localities of Vaibhav Chowk, Jockim Compound, Jamil Nagar, Pratap Nagar, Utkarsh Nagar, Kokan Nagar, Samarth Nagar, Nardas Nagar, Sarvoday Nagar, Gamdevi Road, T.P. Road, Jangal Mangal Road, Bhandup (West), Mumbai - 400 078 and areas adjoining thereto in the jurisdiction of Bhandup Police Station in Brihan Mumbai. The Detaining Authority has noticed from the material placed before him that the people residing and carrying out their daily vocations in the above localities and areas are terror stricken and their normal life is affected adversely. Further, the activities of the petitioner were prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order in the said localities in Brihan Mumbai. Upon recording this satisfaction, the Detaining Authority noted that the petitioner was acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. It has also noticed that the petitioner was granted bail in connection with the offences registered with Bhandup Police Station being C.R.Nos.213/2010, 218/2010, 336/2010, 367/2010 and 378/2010 and the petitioner has already availed of bail on 21st October, 2010 and has become a free person. The Detaining Authority then proceeded to record that in view of the petitioner's tendencies and inclinations reflected in the offences committed by him, he was satisfied that after release on bail and petitioner becoming a free person and in the event of his being at large, being a criminal, is likely to indulge in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in future and that with a view to preventing him from acting in such a prejudicial manner in future, it was necessary to detain him under the provisions of the Act.

(2.) On the basis of this satisfaction, the impugned order of detention came to be passed on 18th January, 2011. The same was served on the petitioner on 21st January, 2011. Since then, the petitioner is in Nashik Road Central Prison in connection with the said detention order. As aforesaid, the petitioner has challenged the detention order by sending letter Petition to this Court.

(3.) In the circumstances, we thought it appropriate to appoint Mr. Rizwan Merchant, Advocate to appear as amicus curiae to espouse the petitioner's cause as also to assist the Court. At the same time, we directed the respondents to ensure that the entire compilation pertaining to the impugned order of detention and the grounds of detention as served on the petitioner at the time of execution of the order, be placed on record. The Office of the Public Prosecutor has accordingly placed before us the complete compilation of documents including vernacular documents as well as translated English version of the same consisting of total pages from 1 to 564. In addition, reply affidavit has been filed by the Assistant Police Inspector of Bhandup Police Station to oppose this Petition. As the Petition was received in the form of letter sent by petitioner through jail, the learned amicus curiae has articulated the grounds which could be raised by the petitioner on the basis of the letter Petition and also with reference to the compilation of documents made available to him. However, at the time of hearing of the matter, in all fairness, the learned amicus curiae submitted that he would argue three formidable points on the basis of which, the petitioner has good chance of succeeding in this Petition.