Back
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :B.C.PATEL
RAMANBHAI GABUBHAI SANSI - Appellant
Versus
E.I.KALASHAVA - Respondent
S.C.A.9390 of 1999
Decided On : 03/10/2000
Bombay Prohibition Act - Section 66 (B) and 65 (E) - Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities, 1985 - Detention for illegal liquor selling - Detenu was found in the habit of importing foreign liquor illegally and keeping the same without pass or permit as also selling prohibited liquor - He was detained and hence his detention was challenged - Held, The representation contemplated by article 22 (5) of the Constitution and sec. 9 (1) of the Act can be made to the State Government, and not to the detaining authority, viz. the authorised officer. In the instant case, the representation is considered by the appropriate government - Therefore, there is no question of prejudice if the representation has been considered by the detaining authority, viz. authorised officer 7 days thereafter. It may be noted that it is not the case of the detenu that representation which was forwarded to the authorised officer was not a representation as contemplated under Article 22 (5) of the Constitution and that it was an application for revocation of the order. Application for revocation of the order and representation against the detention order, both are different - It is not the case of the detenu that the approval was not made by the State Government within the period prescribed i. e. within 12 days - As the order is approved by the State Government, detaining authority has no power to revoke the order of detention - The general power of revocation was conferred only on the State Government - Thus, after the approval of the detention order authorised officer has no express or general power to revoke, rescind or modify the order - It is only the State Government which has power to revoke rescind or modify the order - Application is allowed. (Para 11)
( 1 ) THE detenu detained under the provisions contained in the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities, 1985 (hereinafter referred as the "pasa Act") by an order dated 13. 8. 99 made by the District Magistrate, Dahod, has filed this petition challenging the order of detention annexed at Annexure A to the petition. The grounds of detention served on the detenu are placed on record at Annexure B dated 13. 8. 99. Reading the grounds of detention, the following facts emerge.
( 2 ) THE detenu was found in the habit of importing foreign liquor illegally and keeping the same without pass or permit as also selling prohibited liquor. With a view to continue the nefarious activities, the detenu was administering threat with dire consequences to the innocent people. The detenu was found in the habit of chasing innocent women visiting the hospital known as Urban Bank Hospital situated in Dahod. On account of these activities, there was no safety of females visiting the hospital without any escort. The Detaining Authority has pointed out that there were seven cases pending against the detenu. The details of which are as under:-1. On 16. 12. 95, offences punishable under Section 66 (B) and 65 (E) of the Bombay Prohibition Act were registered vide CR No. 310/95 as he was found in possession of 10 litres of country made liquor. 2. An offence was registered against the detenu on 11. 2. 96 vide CR No. 48/96 for an offence punishable under Section 65 (b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. He was found in possession without pass or permit wash weighing 40 kg for the purpose of manufacturing country liquor. The case is pending against the detenu and is released on bail. 3. An offence was registered on 14. 7. 96 vide C. R. No. 268/96 for offences punishable under Section 66-B, 65-A, 116-B and 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act. The detenu was found in possession of 4 beer bottles at his house without bail by the Court. 4. FIR was lodged against the detenu on 22. 9. 96 vide CR No. 350/96 for offences punishable under Section 66-B, 65-A, 116-B and 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act. He was found in possession of foreign liquor bottles 528 in number valued at Rs. 31680. 00 without pass or permit. The detenu has been released on bail by the Court. 5. On 9. 3. 1997, FIR was registered against the detenu vide CR 80/97 for the offences punishable under Section 66-B, 65-A, 116-B and 81 of the Bombay Prohibition Act. He was found transporting foreign liquor bottles 1056 in number in a jeep bearing GJ-20-A. 38 without pass or permit. Thus the petitioner was found transporting liquor worth Rs. 36960. 00 in a vehicle. The detenu was produced before the Court and he was released on bail. 6. On 21. 9. 98, FIR was lodged against the detenu being CR No. 200/98 for offences punishable under Section 66-B, 65-A and 116-B of the Bombay Prohibition Act. He was found in his residential premises with possession of 4 bottles of beer without pass or permit. The Court released the detenu on bail. 7. On 6. 6. 1999 FIR was lodged against the detenu vide C. R. No. 111/99 for offences punishable under the provisions of Section 66-B, 65-A and 116-B of the Bombay Prohibition Act. He was found in possession of 8 boxes of liquor containing 96 bottles valued at Rs. 11,520. 00 without pass or permit. The detenu was produced before the Magistrate and he was released on bail.
( 3 ) THE Detaining Authority was satisfied that despite the fact that there is a prohibition in the State of Gujarat, the detenu by committing offences under the Bombay Prohibition Act was bringing illicit liquor illegaly and by keeping the same without pass or permit was selling the same. The Detaining Authority found him as a bootlegger. It is also indicated in the grounds of detention that on account of terror of the detenu the witnesses were not coming forward to disclose the details. However, on assurance being given by the Detaining Authority, they have made statements before the Police with a
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
