Non-communication of vital documents and incomplete translations in a detention order can vitiate the order and deny the detainee's right to make an effective representation.

S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.

By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner (detenu) challenges an order of preventive detention.

2. The said order, dated 2-5-2017, records that with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, the Commissioner of Police, Brihan Mumbai is satisfied that it is necessary to make an order directing him to be detained under the provisions of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Dangerous persons, Video Pirates, Sand Smugglers and persons engaged in Black-marketing of Essential Commodities Act, 1981 (“MPDA Act” for short).

3. The powers under section 3, sub-section (2) of the MPDA Act have been invoked to pass this order.

4. We have to note very few facts for appreciating the grounds of challenge to this detention order.

5. The detention order together with the grounds came to be served and that recites that the petitioner is a violent type of dangerous criminal, having taken to the life of a criminal for the sake of easy money. With a view to have an upper hand in the localities of Azad Mohalla, Shantinagar, Near Gousiya Masjid, Sangam Nagar, Wadala (East), Mumbai and adjoining areas within the jurisdiction of Wadala T.T. Police Station in Brihan Mumbai, the petitioner has formed a gang of like-minded criminals from the above localities. He has unleashed a reign of terror in the above areas and has thereby become a perpetual danger to the life and properties of the people residing and carrying out their daily vocations in these areas.

6. The petitioner and his associates are moving in the above areas armed with different kinds of weapons like a chopper, knife, sword, iron-rod, sickle, cricket stump, etc., committing offences and are engaged in criminal activities such as causing physical hurt to people, assault, attempt to commit murder, robbery, extortion, trespass and criminal intimidation, etc.. The petitioner and his associates are alleged to have indulged in criminal mischief and intimidation in the above localities. While engaging in such criminal activities, the petitioner has also terrorised people to ensure that the victims of the crime are not assisted in any manner. Thus, the petitioner in order to demonstrate his supremacy in the locality has created a reign of terror. Such activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, peace and tranquility in the above localities in Brihan Mumbai. As far as criminal cases registered against the petitioner, a list of the same is made in para 4(a) of these grounds of detention.

7. From para 4(b), the preventive actions taken against the petitioner are set out.

8. Then, it is alleged that there was a detention order under the same enactment duly served and executed upon the petitioner. The aforementioned steps and preventive actions have not resulted in curbing or putting an end to his criminal activities. There are certain incidents which are then narrated from para 5 and which would indicate that the reign of terror continues.

9. It is stated that the petitioner was arrested in connection with offences and details of which are then set out. There was a voluntary statement made and there was a recovery. Then, there was an order of remand to police custody after which a magisterial custody was directed.

10. After all these details are set out, it is stated that the further inquiries revealed that the petitioner has victimised a lot many people residing in the localities and being a dangerous person it is difficult for these persons to complain openly against him or give a statement. Then, there are in-camera statements referred and details of those are set out in the grounds of detention.

11. After the materials are referred, necessary satisfaction is recorded in paras 6 and 7 of the detention order and paras 8 to 12 thereof read as under :-

“8. I further inform you that pending approval of t