JUDGMENT

S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J.:— The above three writ petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India, filed by three different petitioners/ detenus are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment as common contentions are raised challenging the validity of the impugned orders of detention dated 16-9-1988.

2. The detention orders in the above cases were passed by the Commissioner of Police. Ahmedabad, the first respondent herein, in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (i) of Section 3 of the Gujarat .Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as the Act with of a view to preventing the petitioners/detenus from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in the area of Ahmedabad city. All the grounds of detention which are similar except the reference of the cases registered against each of the petitioners spell out that the detaining authority has reached his subjective satisfaction on the materials placed before him that all the petitioners are dangerous persons within the ambit of Section 2(c). At the end of each of the grounds of detention, it is specifically averred that "the copies of the papers shown in the schedule are given to you hereby" meaning thereby that all the cases noted in Annexure D have been taken into consideration against each of the writ petitioners for holding that they are alldangerous persons. We would like to re-produce Annexure D to the grounds of detention for appreciating the contentions urged on behalf of the petitioners : -

"The sheet showing the fact of the papers of the secret inquiry against (1) Nasirkhan. (2) Sharifkhan and (3) Meheboobkhan"

Sr. No. Details of Papers Date Page No. Remarks

1. True copy of F.I.R. of Kagdapith I.209/84 29-5-84 1 to 6

2. True copy of face marks registered and charge-sheet of F.I.R. Maninagar I. 122/86 13-6-86 7 to 38

3. True copy of F.I.R. and facemarks registered of Karanj Police Station I. 70/88 4-2-88 39 to 48

4. True copy of F.I.R. and face marks registered Kagdapith II. 464/88 13-9-88 49 to 60

5. True copy of record of entry number 20 KC dated 7-9-88 7-9-88 61 to 62

6. True copy of F.I.R. of Prohibition 379/88 23-8-88 63 to 72

7. Statement of witness No. 1 13-9-88 73 to 74

8. Statement of witness No. 2 13-9-88 75 to 76

9. Statement of witness No. 3 14-9-88 77 to 78

10. Statement of witness No. 4 14-9-88 79 to 80

Sd/-

Police Inspector,

Kagadapith,

Ahmedabad city."

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners assailed the validity of the impugned orders of detention on the ground that they suffer from the vices of non-application of mind and extraneous consideration. Before adverting to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel, we shall mention that all the three writ petitioners/detenus and one Ayubkhan Nawabkhan are brothers and admittedly there is no detention order against Ayubkhan Nawabkhan. As stated supra, these impugned orders are based on the sole ground that the petitioners are dangerous persons.

4. In the grounds of detention under challenge in Writ Petition No. 478 of 1988 only two cases, registered against the detenu Mehboobkhan Nawabkhan are shown to have been considered for holding that the petitioner is a dangerous person within the definition of Section 2(c) of the-Act. These two cases are shown under SI. Nos. 2 and 4 of Annexure D extracted above. It is not in dispute that this writ petitioner is not at all concerned in any of. the other cases mentioned under St. Nos. 1, 3, 5 and 6 in Annexure D.

5. In the grounds of detention, concerned in Writ Petition No.479/88 - three cases registered against the petitioner are referred to have been considered for bringing him within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Act and those cases are mentioned under Serial Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of Annexure D. It is not in controversy as in the case of Writ Petition No. 478/88 that this writ petitioner (detenu) Nasirkhan Nawabkhan Pathan is not concerned in any one of the other cases; un