C. V. N. SASTRI, J.

( 1 ) IN this writ petition an order of detention dated 8-8-1996 passed by the collector and District Magistrate, East Godavari District, Kakinada, detaining one Vasireddy Peddiraju under Section 3 (2) read with Section 3 (1) of the andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) is under challenge.

( 2 ) IN the order of detention it is stated that the detenu is organising a racket of bootlegging in and around Ravulapalem Village and is smuggling Indian made liquor like brandy, whisky which are prohibited as per the provisions of a. P. Prohibition Act, 1995 and A. P. Excise Act, 1968 and thereby he has indulged in acts prejudicial to the maintenance of public order through dangerous activities. The order sets out the details of a number of cases in which the detenu was involved, and states that with a view to preventing him from further acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, the detaining authority is satisfied that the provisions of the Act should be invoked to detain him. Accordingly he was detained and lodged in the Central Prison at Rajahmundry.

( 3 ) IN the grounds of detention it is stated that the detenu is not a licensee or a holder of any permit to deal in any kind of liquors under the provisions of the a. P. Prohibition Act, 1995 and the A. P. Excise Act, that he has been indulging in clandestine movement and import of I. M. L. into East Godavari District for sale in violation of the provisions of A. P. Prohibition Act and the A. P. Excise Act and acting as a bootlegger as defined under Section 2 (b) of the Act in a prejudicial manner to the maintenance of public order as defined under Section 2 (a) read with Explanation given under the said Section of the Act. The details of six crimes in which the detenu was involved are also set out in the grounds of detention. It is further stated that the samples of liquor seized in those cases were sent for chemical analysis and on analysis they were found to be Indian made liquor as per the report of Government Chemical Examiner for Excise, kakinada. All the said cases are still pending investigation. It is finally stated in the grounds of detention that since the culmination of criminal prosecution against the detenu under the normal process of law will take a long time, it may not be sufficient to immediately prevent the detenu from indulging in the same prejudicial activities and, therefore, the detaining authority is satisfied that he should be detained under the provisions of the Act with a view to preventing the detenu from further acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and smuggling of I. M. L. into East Godavari District as mentioned above in a manner which is prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

( 4 ) THE order of detention is challenged, inter alia, on the grounds that the detenu is a respectable and law-abiding citizen, that he is innocent, that he is falsely implicated in the said cases, that he has been enlarged on bail in all those cases and that, in any case, the order of detention is illegal and unsustainable inasmuch as the alleged activities of the detenu are not, in any way, prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. It is further contended that inasmuch as the chemical analysis report does not reveal the presence of any substance in the samples of liquor seized in the above cases which is hazardous or injurious to publichealth or safety, the order of detention is not sustainable. The order is also bad in law as it does not mention the period of detention. In support of the said contentions, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the following decisions: B. C. Subbarayudu vs. District Collector and K. Chinnappa reddy vs. District Collector.

( 5 ) IN the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent

Click Here to Read the rest of this document