JUDGMENT

RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J.:— This writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner (the detenu herein) canvassing the correctness of the detention order dated 30-8-88 made by the detaining authority namely Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad city in exercise of the powers conferred on him under sub-s. (1) of S. 3 of. the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with a view to preventing the detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial the maintenance of public order in the area of Ahmedabad city. In pursuance of the above order, the detenu is detained in the Central Jail, Sabarmati. The detenu has been furnished with the copies of the grounds of detention and all other material documents inclusive of the statements of the witnesses on the basis of which the detaining authority reached his subjective satisfaction for passing this impugned order.

2. The sum and substance of the alleged activities of the detenu mentioned in grounds of detention are that the detenu was indulging in criminal and anti-social activities in the area of Dariyapur Kalupur of Ahmedabad city by illegally storing and selling foreign liquor and beer either personally or through his associates and that in this regard the following four cases were registered under the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act of 1949. We reproduce the relevant portion giving the details of the cases as found in the grounds of detention :

Sr. No. Police Station CR No. Sec. Qty Seized Disposals

1. Kalupur 130/88 Prov. 66(B) 8 Ltr. beer Pending in Court

2. Kalupur 152/88 - - 500 ML beer Order pending

3. Kalupur 156/88 - - 268 bottle foreign and 122 bottle box Pending in court.

4. Dariyapur 80/88 Prov. foreign liquor Order pending

66(B)

65(A)81

3. From the above materials, the detaining authority has concluded that the detenu was a bootlegger within the meaning of Section 2(b) of the Act.

4. It is further stated that the detenu besides indulging in the activities of bootlegging, he and his companions were creating terror in that area by beating innocent people in public in Ahmedabad city which in turn affected adversely the maintenance of public order.

5. Further it is stated that the detenu and his associates always armed with dangerous weapons like bombs, cartridges etc. were threatening the people in the city of Ahmedabad in respect of which a case has been registered which is reproduced as set out in the grounds of detention :

S. No. Police Station CR No. Section Disposal

(1) Kalupur 2/88 IPC 307, 120(B) 212; Terrorist Act, Sec. 3(1)(3); Explosives Secs. 4, 5; Arms Act 25(1)(A)(c); Bombay Police Act 135(1) Under inquiry

6. In addition to the above it is alleged that the detenu, being the main member of the gang of Abdul Latif Abdul Wahab Shaikh entered into a conspiracy to spread an atmosphere of fear and terror among the residents of that area and also a sense of insecurity among the people.

7. On the above materials, mentioned in the grounds of detention, the detaining authority has come to the conclusion that the detenu is a dangerous person, within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Act.

8. Thus the detaining authority has found that the detenu was not only a bootlegger but also a dangerous person within the definitions of Sections 2(b) and 2(c) of the Act. For drawing the above conclusions the detaining authority has also relied upon the statements of the witnesses whose names are not disclosed.

9. Assailing the legality of the impugned order the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner put forth several contentions one of which being that the conclusions drawn by the detaining authority that the detenu is a bootlegger as well as a dangerous person are not supported by the materials placed before him and that there is nothing to show that the activities of the detenu either affected or were likely to affect adversely the maintenance of public order.

10. We shall now deal with the