2. The prejudicial activities of the detenu are contained in the grounds of detention dated 22-2-1999. True copies of the detention order and the grounds of detention are annexed as Annexures A and C respectively to the petition.

3. A perusal of the grounds of detention would show that the impugned detention order is founded on two N.C.Rs. 1 C.R. and three in-camera statements. The details of the first N.C.R are mentioned in para 4(a). In short, it has been alleged therein that on 14-8-1998, one Shankar Anant Raut lodged a complaint at the Agripada Police Station alleging therein that the detenu had given him threats because of his suspicion that his illicit liquor business was closed at his instance.

Grounds 4(b) to 4(b)(vii) deal with the criminal complaint filed by one Shrikant Avashikar, on 27-10-1998, at the Agripada Police Station, on the basis of which, on offence under section 326 read with 34, Indian Penal Code was registered against the detenu and his associates vide C.R. No. 307/1998. It has been alleged that on 27-10-1998, at about 6.30 p.m. when Shrikant Avashikar was proceeding along with verandah of building No. 2 in B.I.T. Chawl to take exercise, the detenu's associate Naresh Kadu pounced upon him and the detenu inflicted chopper blows on his back, knees and head. As a consequence of the act committed by the detenu and his associates, the nearby residents closed their doors and windows out of fear and an unusual clam prevailed.

Ground No. 4(c) deals with a N.C complaint dated 1-11-1998 lodged by Shankar Anant Raut at the Agripada Police Station against the detenu. It is mentioned therein that on the said date, while he (Shankar Anant Raut) and his wife were proceeding along the Anandrao Nair Road and had reached near the Hindusthan Mill Gate, the detenu threatened him and picked up a quarrel with him regarding the N.C. complaint mentioned in ground No. 4(a).

The three in-camera statements are contained in ground Nos. 4(d)(i), 4(d)(ii) and 4(d)(iii).

In ground No. 4(d)(i) it has been mentioned that witness A who is a vegetable vendor residing in B.I.T. Chawl, Agripada, Mumbai, in his statement dated 11-11-1998, stated that he knew the detenu as a person having connection with Amar Naik gang and being engaged with his associates in extorting monies from the shop-keepers etc. on the point of lethal weapons. Sometimes, in the second week of October, 1998, at about 11 a.m. when he started his business, an unknown person came to him and told him that the detenu had called him at the B.I.T. Chawl. No. 2/1. He got scared and followed the unknown person and when he approached the detenu, the latter threatened him in abusive language and asked him to pay Rs. 5,000/- and when he told him that it was difficult to give such a big amount, the associates of the detenue, at the instance, of the detenu, turned his hand-cart turtle. Seeing this incident, the hawkers and customers ran away helter-skelter and then he agreed to give Rs. 5,000/- to the detenu.

Ground No. 4(d)(ii) deals with the statement of witness 'B' who is working and residing at B.I.T. Chawl, Agripada, Mumbai. He stated that he knew the detenu as a member of the Amar Naik gang who used to extort monies from the hawkers and shop-keepers on the point of lethal weapons. He stated that in the last week of September, 1998, sometimes in the night, when he had gone to take pan, the deten