JUDGMENT :

Shailesh P. Brahme, J.

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard both the sides finally with their consent.

2. This petition seeks to challenge order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the District Magistrate, Jalgaon detaining the petitioner U/Sec. 3(1) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred as to the ‘M.P.D.A. Act’ for the sake of brevity and convenience).

3. The respondent No. 2/District Magistrate proceeded against the petitioner U/Sec. 3(1) of the M. P. D. A. Act on the basis of five offences, two preventive actions and in camera statements of the witnesses. The petitioner is held to be a bootlegger, whose activities are recorded to be prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has advanced following submissions :

I. Subjective satisfaction is perverse.

II. In CR No. 760/2018 and CR. No. 24/2019, the petitioner does not figure in FIR.

III. Most of the crimes are shown to be against one Santosh Raut not the petitioner.

IV. There is no incriminating material to proceed against the petitioner for draconian a