SOMNATH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to quash and set aside the impugned order dtd. 8/6/2023 passed by the respondent no.2 under Sec. 3(1) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Dangerous persons, video Pirates, Sand Smugglers and Persons engaged in Black Marketing Essential Commodities Act, 1981 (Amendment of 2015)(for short, 'MPD Act'). The petitioner further challenges to the order dtd. 17/7/2023 passed by the respondent no.1 under Sec. 3 of the MPD Act, confirming the order dtd. 8/6/2023 of the respondent no.2.

(3.) Brief resume of the facts which give rise to this petition are stated as under: The proposal for detention was made by the Assistant Police Inspector of Police Station, Bitergaon to detain the petitioner under the provisions of MPD Act on the ground that the petitioner is dangerous person. Number of offences have been registered against the petitioner. The detaining authority, after relying on two crimes registered within last six months as well as the in-camera statements of witness 'A' and 'B' came to the conclusion that the petitioner has created a sense of terror in people's mind. The witnesses and victim do not come forward and complaint because of the fear. The activities of petitioner are adversely likely to affect, the maintenance of public order. Therefore, the respondent no.2"detaining authority has passed the impugned order dtd. 8/6/2023 and was supplied to the petitioner alongwith the ground for detention. The said order of respondent no.2 was confirmed by the respondent no.1"State Government by its order dtd. 17/7/2023 under the provisions of MPD Act. Feeling aggrieved with the said order, the present writ petition came to be filed.