Errors in translation must prejudicially affect the right of the detenue to make an effective representation.

JUDGMENT

Manish Pitale, J. - By this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order of detention dated 21.08.2020 passed by the respondent No.1 i.e. Commissioner of Police, Nashik City under section 3 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 (hereinafter referred as "the MPDA Act") whereby petitioner has been detained. The order of detention and the grounds of detention along with relied upon material were served upon the petitioner.

2. Although number of grounds have been raised on behalf of the petitioner in the present writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has pressed grounds (c), (h), (i) and (f) in order to challenge the aforesaid detention order. Ground (c) pertains to improper recording of subjective satisfaction about truthfulness of in camera statements. Grounds (h) and (i) pertain to wrong translation of relied upon documents and ground (f) pertains to alleged non-application of mind by the respondent No.1 - detaining authority while issuing the detention order.

3. Ms. Jayshree Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner specifically submitted that a perusal of the record would show that the truthfulness of the in camera statements was not properly verified and recorded that there was no subjective satisfaction of the officers in that regard. It was submitted that this indicated that the in camera statements could not be accepted as authentic and they could not have been utilized for the purpose of issuing the detention order. In support of the said ground, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Lakhan Rohidas Jagtap Vs. Commissioner of Police, Pune & Ors.,2009 AllMR(Cri) 5261, Smt. Vijay Raju Gupta Vs. R. H. Mendonce & Ors., (2001) AllMR(Cri) 48, Zabin Salim Shaikh Vs. Shri. A. N. Roy, (2006) AllMR(Cri) 3324 and Ashish S/o Robert Felix Vs. Commissioner of Police, Nagpur City, Criminal Writ Petition No.390 of 2014.

4. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the context of grounds (h) and (i) raised in the writ petition that wrong translation of vital documents relied upon by the respondent No.1 - detaining authority had vitiated the detention order. It was submitted that such wrong translation adversely affected the right of the petitioner under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India for making an effective representation.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that a perusal of the detention order demonstrated that there was non-application of mind because it was stated by the respondent No.1 that prejudicial activities of the petitioner concerned six named areas and adjoining localities of Nashik city whereas there was no material to support such an assertion. On this basis, it was claimed that the detention order deserved to be set aside. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon Vijaya Ganesh Gajre Vs. Commissioner of Police, Pune & Ors., Criminal Writ Petition No.5052 of 2015.

6. On the other hand, Mr. J. P. Yagnik, learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that there was no substance in the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner. Firstly, it was stated that the ground pertaining to alleged improper verification about truthfulness of in camera statements was not sustainable because there was no set format under which such verification was required to be recorded. It was submitted that in the present case the material on record sufficiently demonstrated that the in camera statements had been verified by the concerned officer and that therefore it could not be said that such statements were not reliable or that the respondent No.1 could not have considered such statements while issuing the detention order. In this regard, learned APP relied upon judgment of this dated 03/04.03.2016 passed in Criminal W