Gujarat High Court
SCA/9592/1996 of YUSUF SULEMAN PATHAN ALIAS YUSUF TAXI Vs DISTRICT MAGISTRATE on 17 December 1996
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 9592 of 1996 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 9592 of 1996
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
0
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?
-------------------------------------------------------------- YUSUF SULEMAN PATHAN ALIAS YUSUF TAXIVersus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR ANIL S DAVE for Petitioner MR UA TRIVEDI, AGP for Respondent No. 1, 3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR Date of decision: 17/12/96
ORAL JUDGEMENT
1. It is well settled that, merely because a person is a bootlegger, he cannot be preventively detained under the provisions of the Gujarat Prevention of the Anti Social Activities Act, 1985, unless as laid down in sub-section (4) of section 3 of the Act that the activities of a person as a bootlegger affect adversely or are likely to affect the maintenance of public order.
2. No reply to the petition has been filed. However, the application has been opposed by the learned AGP.
3. I have perused the material on record with the assistance of the learned counsel. There is no material to indicate that the activities of the petitioner as a bootlegger have in any way affected adversely or are likely to affect adversely the maintenance of public order. Thus, the detention of the petitioner is illegal and the same is not sustainable.
4. In the result, this Special Civil Application is allowed. The impugned order of detention being illegal is quashed and set aside. The petitioner shall be released forthwith, if he is not required in any other case. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
���*** *** ***
parmar*