HEM RAJ JHUNJHUNWALA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who has been detained under the provisions of the Prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the 1980 Act) by an order of detention dated 9th April, 1980 (Annexure '4') passed by the District Magistrate, Singhbhum for alleged violation of the restriction imposed by Notification no. 21423/P. C., dated 20-12-1954 in the Department of Supply and Commerce of the Government of Bihar, with respect to the despatch of salt from the State of Bihar to the State of West Bengal, has filed the present writ application for quashing the order of his detention. The main ground on which the detention order has been challenged by Shri A. K. Sen, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, is that the notification, which controlled the movement of salt, itself was not in force and, therefore, the order of detention cannot be sustained.

(2.) That the petitioner is resident of a place known as Chakulia which lies within the district of Singhbhum and is situated only at a short distance from West Bengal. One of his sons, Bharat Kumar, resides with him in the same bouse and carried business in salt. The stand of the petitioner is that he has no connection, whatsoever, with the business of his son. This fact is controverted by the respondents. The reasons and points which have been urged before us in challenge of the oder do not necessitate entering into the realm of the disputed fact.

(3.) On 17th March, 1980 the petitioner's son was summoned by Chakulia Police, but inasmuch as he was out of station, the petitioner himself went there. The police authorities desired to search the premises of his son and search was made in presence of the petitioner of the business premises, which is situated in a part of the residential house of the petitioner. The stock registers and cash memos etc. in respect of the salt business (vide seizure list, annexure '1') were seized by the police and the petitioner was asked to accompany them to the police. And on his arrival, he was suddenly arrested. In the counter - affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 in this regard, however, this fact is controverted and according to them he was arrested only on the filing of the first information report on the next day, i.e. on 18-3-1980 which was lodged by the Circle Officer Chakulia, a copy of which has been made annexure '2' to the writ application. The first information report was received at 21.30 hours and was registered as Chakulia P. S. Case no. 7 dated 18-3-1980 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Sec. 471 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and his son, aforesaid : It has been alleged in the first information report that ' Hemraj Jhunjhunwala has been violating the ban on the export of salt out of territories of the Bihar State. This is the cognizable offence under