RIZWAN Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the order of detention dated 5th May, 2014 passed under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Dangerous Persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as, "the said Act", for short).

(2.) WE have heard Shri U.N. Tripathi, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri J.P. Yagnik, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondents, at length.

(3.) SHRI U.N. Tripathi, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner urged various grounds in support of the challenge to the order of detention. It was submitted that no subjective satisfaction was recorded by the detaining authority before passing the impugned order. The statements of the witnesses on the basis of which the order of detention was passed were also not supplied to the petitioner. It was further urged that though the petitioner had made a representation on 17.5.2014 and the respondent No. 2 had received it on the same day, there was unreasonable delay in considering the aforesaid representation and taking a decision thereon. In support of the aforesaid submission, the learned Counsel relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 643 of 2014 (Riyaz Ahmed Batatawala Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) decided on 2.5.2014. It was therefore submitted that there being violation of the provisions of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India in not considering the representation of the petitioner expeditiously, the order of detention was required to be set aside.