JUDGMENT - AGUIAR A.S., J.:---The present criminal writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, who is the mother of the detenu, challenges the order dated 11-10-2001 passed by the respondent No. 1 Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay in exercise of powers conferred on him under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (Amendment-1996) on.

2. The activities of the detenu necessitating the passing of the impugned order have been set out in the grounds of detention of the same date i.e. 11-10-2001 which have been served upon the detenu along with the detention order of the same date. The grounds of detention are set out in para 4(a)(i) and 4(a)(ii). The ground of detention No. 4(a)(i) reads as follows:

"4(a)(i) On 21-4-2001, you approached Shri Sayyed Alvi and demanded hapta money. However, Shri Sayyed Alavi refuse to pay you hapta money, when you assaulted Shri Alvi, in retaliation, Shri Sayyed Alavi also assaulted you. In this connection, a case under sections 324, 504 Indian Penal Code vide C.R. No. 85/2001 has been registered against Shri Sayyed Alavi at Dongri Police Station."

The ground of detention No. 4(a)(ii) reads as follows:

"4(a)(ii) On 10-5-2001, at about 23.45 hours, Shri Sayyed Alavi had gone to see his foster mother Smt. Julubai Hassan and sister Parvin at 130/132, Nishanpada Road, Abubakar Manzil, 1st floor, Room No. 11, Dongri, and he was gossiping with them. When you came there, and forcibly entered into the house of Smt. Julubai Hassan and you demanded ransom of Rs. 10,000/- with Shri Sayyed Alavi, Shri Sayyed Alavi refused to accede your demand. On this, you threatened Shri Sayyed Alavi however, Shri Sayyed Alavi saying that, and saying so you slapped him. Shri Sayyed Alavi became stunned due to fear. After confirming that you had left the place, Shri Sayyed Alavi called at Dongri Police Station and reported the matter."

In this connection, on the complaint of Shri Sayeed Mohiddin Alavai, a case under sections 387, 452, 506(II) Indian Penal Code vide C.R. No. 98 of 2001 was registered against the detenu at Dongri Police Station on 11-5-2001.

3. The challenge to the order of detention is set out in the grounds of challenge more specifically at ground (D), namely, that the Detaining Authority has taken into consideration Crime No. 98 of 2001 as set out in para 4(a)(ii) on which the order of detention is passed. It is contended that the incident on the basis of which Crime No. 98 of 2001 was recorded can by no stretch of imagination be said to be the one which disturbs public order. It is contended that the ground of detention nowhere set out the immediate impact of the act of the detenu on society or at least on a segment of the society and since public order is not disturbed, section 3 of the MPDA Act, 1981 is not attracted and hence, the order of detention is illegal and bad in law. Mr. Tripathi, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has further pointed out that the said incident took place inside the house and not in the public place. Further, no weapon is alleged to have been used and hence, the Detaining Authority has not applied his mind to the facts of the case before passing the said order.

4. So far as ground 4(b) of the detention order is concerned, it is pointed out that the confidential enquiries made regarding the detenu disclose that number of people have been affected at his hands and that, since the detenu has weapons, nobody is willing to give statement against him due to fear of retaliation. However, two witnesses have given statements, namely, witness (A) whose statement was recorded on 6-7-2001 and witness (B) whose statement is recorded on 29-8-2001.

5. Witness (A) has referred to an incident in the first week of May, 2000 and alleged that, "When you entered the guest house and demanded Rs. 5000/- as hafta money and on his showing ina