Judgement

HEGDE, J. : In this appeal by special leave, the question for decision is whether the appellant s detention under sub-clause (iii) of Clause (a) of sub sec. (1) of Section 3 and of Section 4 of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950, (IV of 1950) - to be hereinafter referred to as "the Act", as per order of the Governor of Bihar No. A-DE-Pur-1501/67/6357/C dated September 25, 1967, is unlawful.

2. The appellant is a partner in the grocery shop by name "Shanti Stores" in Gulab Bagh where sugar, maida, soap, match boxes, kerosene oil and other articles are sold. He is said to have indulged in black-marketing in essential commodities. As per the order of September 27, 1967 grounds in support of the appellant s detention were supplied. They read as follows :

"(a) On 10th March, 1967, he sold match boxes and soap to a shopkeeper of Purnea Court compound at a price higher than that fixed for these commodities and did not grant any receipt for the same.

(b) On 15th March 1967, it transpired from one Satyanarain Prasad, a shop -keeper of Purnea Bus Stand, that he (Shri Motilal Jain) sold him match boxes at Rs. 11 per gross which was Rs. 2 higher than the price fixed. This was also substantiated by Nagendra Ramoli, a shop keeper of Purnea Court compound who had also been supplied match boxes at the higher rate by him (Shri Motilal Jain).

(c) On 15th April 1967, it transpired from Chandradeb Sao Shankarlal Modi, and Sitaram Sah, all of Gulab Bagh that they got supplies of sugar and maida from him in excess of the quantity allotted to them on ration cards at a price higher than those fixed by the Government.

(d) On 7th May, 1967, he sold kerosene oil to one Kishun Bhagat of Gulab Bagh at Rs. 12 per tin (excluding cost of tin) which was higher than the price fixed by the Government.

(e). On 4th July 1967 he sold sugar at Rs. 2 per kg. to Shyamsunder Poddar and Jangli Singh of Dhamdaha. The price charged by him was much higher than the rate fixed by the Government in this regard.

(f) On 7th August 1967, it was learnt from Nathu Sah, Chanderdeb Sah. Kusumlal Sah, and Ram Rattan Sah, all of Gulab Bagh, that he (Shri Motilal Jain) indulged in black-marketing of sugar, maids, kerosene oil and other controlled commodities, to deal in which he had obtained licence. It was further learnt from Moti Sah a worker of Gulab Bagh Navayuvak Sangh that he (Shri Motitlal Jain) obtained supplies of match boxes, vegetable oil from West Bengal to sell them in black market."

3. Though the appellant made representation against his order of detention to the Advisory Board, the said Board did not recommend his case for release Thereafter he approached the High Court of Patna in Cr. W. J. C. No. 92 of 1966 (Pat) under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for a writ or order in the nature of habeas corpus directing his release from detention. A Bench of that High Court consisting of the learned Chief Justice and B. N. Jha, J. refused to entertain that petition with these observations :

"We have also gone through the grounds stated in annexure B and find that specific instances with full particulars have been given. On the basis of those instances the detaining authority has held that the petitioner has been indulging in black marketing of essential commodities. Mr. Balbhadra Prasad Singh challenged the correctness of the facts stated in the grounds and also filed affidavits by certain persons and urged that those allegations of facts should not be believed. This Court in its writ jurisdiction cannot sit in second appeal and examine whether specific instances of black marketing were established by satisfactory evidence.

"For these reasons, we are not satisfied that this is a fit case for-admission. The application is accordingly dismissed."

It is against that order the appellant has come up in appeal to this Court.

4. Mr. Chagla, learned counsel for the appellant, contended that each one of the grounds supplied to the appella