Gujarat High Court
SCA/5525/1997 of PIR MOHD. @ PIRUMIYA @ BHAIJANNIK MOHAMMAD SHAIKH Vs COMMISSIONER OF POLICE on 12 December 1997
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 5525 of 1997 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 5525 of 1997
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR
============================================================
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge?
1 to 5 No
-------------------------------------------------------------- PIR MOHD. @ PIRUMIYA @ BHAIJANNIK MOHAMMAD SHAIKHVersus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR SUNIL C PATEL for Petitioner MR. D.P. JOSHI, A.G.P. for Respondent No. 1, 2, 3
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR
Date of decision: 12/12/97
ORAL JUDGEMENT
By way of this Special Civil Application, the petitioner has challenged the order of detention dated 16.7.1997 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Surat City. It is now well settled that merely because the detenu is a bootlegger, he cannot be preventively detained under the provisions of Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to `as the Act of 1985'), unless there is material to show that his activities as a bootlegger has affected adversely or likely to affect adversely the maintenance of public order. Reference may be made to a decision of the apex court in the case of PIYUSH KANTILAL MEHTA VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, AHMEDABAD reported in AIR 1989 SC
491.
2. No reply to the petition has been filed. However, this Special Civil Application is opposed by the learned A.P.P.
3. I have perused the material on record with the assistance of the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. Some cases have been registered against the petitioner for offences under the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1948. I have also read the statements of certain witnesses as referred in the grounds of detention. Statements of the witnesses are of general nature and stereotype. The material available on record does not suggest that the activities of the petitioner as bootlegger has been in any way affected adversely or likely to affect adversely the maintenance of public order. Thus, in my view the order of detention is illegal and is not sustainable.
4. In view of the aforesaid, this Special Civil Application is allowed. The impugned order of detention dated 16.7.1997 passed by the Police Commissioner, uSrat City is quashed and set aside. The detenu shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
00000
pkn.