DHARANI RAJA PADYACHI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner/detenu is challenging the order of his detention dated 6th November, 2018 passed by the first respondent under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Dangerous Persons, Video Pirates, Sand Smugglers and Persons Engaged in BlackMarketing of Essential Commodities Act, 1981, (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act" for the sake of brevity). By the said impugned order passed under Section 3(2) of the said Act, by recording satisfaction that the petitioner is a dangerous person and it is necessary to detain him in order to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to maintenance of public order, the respondent No.1 had ordered detention of petitioner/detenu Dharani Raja Padyachi.

(2.) Though Mrs.Ansari, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner raised several legal contentions in order to challenge the order of detention passed by the respondent No.1 and its subsequent approval by the State, in our view, in the facts of the present case, this criminal writ petition deserves to be allowed only on the ground which we indicate hereinafter.

(3.) Ground No.(viii) raised by the petitioner/detenu needs to be reproduced for appreciating the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. According to her, there is delay in sending the report to the State Government after passing order of detention of the petitioner. The law mandates that the report should be submitted to the State Government forthwith and there is no plausible explanation for delay in submitting the report to the State, which infact, was received on 14th November, 2018 by the State. The learned counsel for the petitioner urged that there is no plausible explanation for delay in not submitting the report forthwith to the State by the respondent No.1. The ground raised in this regard is found in paragraph (viii), which reads thus :