Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
V.K. Jadhav, M.G. Sewlikar, JJ.
Ashok Kisan Jadhav - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 1587 of 2020
Decided On : 08-03-2021
MPDA Act - Detention of petitioner challenged - Sections 2(b-1), 2(a), 2(iv), 3, 8, 10, 11, 13 of MPDA Act discussed - Court finds compliance with formalities prescribed by MPDA Act - Detention order communicated to petitioner - Opportunity of making representation provided - Detaining Authority's subjective satisfaction upheld - No extraneous material considered - Absence of specified period of detention does not render order illegal - Petition dismissed
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged his detention under 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). The petitioner was alleged to have criminal tendencies and activities prejudicial to public order. The detention order was served on the petitioner, and he was provided with the opportunity to make representations.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Detaining Authority had complied with the formalities prescribed by the MPDA Act. The petitioner was provided with the opportunity to make representations, and the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority was upheld. The Court also held that the absence of a specified period of detention does not render the order illegal.
Issues: Compliance with formalities prescribed by MPDA Act, opportunity of making representation, subjective satisfaction of Detaining Authority, absence of specified period of detention
Ratio Decidendi: The Court upheld the detention order, finding that the Detaining Authority had complied with the formalities prescribed by the MPDA Act, provided the petitioner with the opportunity to make representations, and had valid subjective satisfaction. The Court also held that the absence of a specified period of detention does not render the order illegal.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as the Court found it devoid of substance.
JUDGMENT
M.G. Sewlikar, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. By consent, heard finally at admission stage.
3. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged his detention under 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 (in short "MPDA Act").
4. Facts leading to this petition in short are that on 22nd August, 2020 Police Station, Ashti, forwarded a proposal for detention of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has criminal tendency and his activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.
5. On the basis of this proposal, the District Magistrate, Beed, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Detaining Authority') passed the order of detention dated 25th August, 2020, stating therein that the petitioner is a weapon-wielding dangerous recidivist person having criminal antecedent. It is further stated that he has become a perpetual danger to the lives and properties of people residing in the local area of the jurisdiction of Ashti Police Station. He and his accomplices are armed with deadly weapons and do not hesitate to use the same while committing offences.
6. It is alleged that the detenu was served with the order of detention alleging that the detenu is a dangerous person and is accused of committing serious offences like murder, attempt to murder, demanding ransom, conspiracy to commit murder and he always keeps fire arms with him. It is further alleged that he has formed a gang and collects ransom. Despite initiating proceeding under Section 110 of the Maharashtra Police Act, there seems to be no improvement in the petitioner and his criminal activities continued unabated. He has created reign of terror in the locality in which he resides because of which, nobody comes forward to lodge complaint or depose against him. Owing to his criminal activities, the persons residing in the jurisdiction of Ashti Police Station and adjoining areas are under constant fear. The detenu has criminal antecedents. Following is the list of offences the detenu has allegedly committed and the preventive action taken against him.
| Offences |
| Sr. No. | Police Station | C.R.No. | Section | Filling date | Remarks |
| 1 | Ambhora | 35/2013 | 307 IPC r.w. Sec. 3/25 (1)(b) of Indian Arms Act. | 30.03.2013 | Pending |
| 2 | Ashti | 101/2016 | 143, 147, 148, 149, 384, 323, 504, 506 IPC r.w. Sec. 3/25 of Indian Arms Act | 24.05.2016 | Pending |
| 3 | Ashti | 246/2016 | 143, 147, 148, 149, 323 IPC r.w. sec. 4/25 of Indian Arms Act | 10.10.2016 | Pending |
| 4 | Ashti | 295/2017 | 384, 504, 506 IPC | 25.07.2017 | Pending |
| 5 | Nagar Taluka Dist. Ahmednagar | 236/2017 | 3/25 of Indian Arms Act | 02.08.2017 | Pending |
| 6 | Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar | 75/2018 | 302, 120(b), 143, 147, 148, 149, 212 IPC r.w. Sec. 3/25, 27, 07 Indian Arms Act | 29.04.2018 | Pending |
| 7 | Ashti | 21/2020 | 142 of Maharashtra Police Act r.w. 3, 7/25 of Indian Arms Act | 03.02.2020 | Pending |
| 8 | Ashti | NC Crime No. 79/2020 | 504, 506 IPC | 25.02.2020 | --- |
7. The detention order further states that in-camera statements of witnesses A and B were recorded. From these statements, it is evident that nobody comes forward to lodge report against the petitioner. Therefore, detention of the petitioner has become necessary.
8. The order of detention was accordingly served on the petitioner. On 26th August, 2020, the petitioner was arrested and detained in Harsul jail. On 28th August, 2020, report regarding detention of the petitioner was sent to the State Government for confirmation. On 31st August, 2020, the State Government approved the detention order passed by the Detaining Authority. On 30
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
