IMPORTANT POINT
Undue delay in passing a detention order and in considering representations violates constitutional rights, rendering the detention illegal.

JUDGMENT :

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner – Keval Sureshbhai Bhundiya, has challenged the order dated 07.02.2014 passed by the respondent – District Magistrate, Porbandar directing him to be detained under the provisions of the Prevention of the Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as “the PBM Act of 1980” for short).

2. The said order has been passed in purported exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1) read with sub- clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the said Act.

3. Brief facts giving rise to file the petition are that the applicant detenue was employee of one Mr.P.D. Vyas, who is in business of transportation doing his business in the name and style P.M. Logistics. In order to implement the scheme for distribution of essential commodities like wheat, rise, etc. meant for the beneficiary of various scheme launch by the State as well as the Central Government, to be distributed through Public Distribution System (“PDS” for short) as well as through fair price shops, had been stored in a different godowns under the jurisdiction of Porbandar District. The employee of State Government as well as the persons, who were involved in the PDS System as well as Logistic Work, conspired to misappropriate the huge amount of food-grains for their personal gains. It is alleged that during 01.01.2020 to 04.01.2023, the applicant and others in all 13 persons defrauded the Government by misappropriating the huge quantity of food-grains stored in the Government godowns under the jurisdiction of Porbandar District. It was noticed that by manipulating stock registered as well as by making forged gate-passes, the huge stocks of food- grains worth Rs.99,77,551/- being misappropriated by committing the act of forgery and criminal breach of trust. The P.M. Logistic, who was awarded a contract for the distribution of food grains at Ranavav Taluka failed to upload the necessary information of the stocks on the online application of the Government. The applicants and others, who were involved in the distribution of the food grains committed an offence under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and under the Penal Laws. After in depth inquiry made by the State Government, the FIR came to be lodged with Ranavav Police Station, Porbandar for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Sections 406, 409, 120B, 465, 467, 471 and 477A of the IPC. The said FIR was registered on 13.01.2023, against 12 persons. The applicant herein was shown as accused no.12 as being a representative of the P.M. Logistic, he had played active role in removing the stocks of the food grains with the aid of godown Manager and others, who were entrusted the work to maintain the stocks as well as distribution system. The applicant herein was arrested on 28.01.2023 and was enlarged on bail on 12.10.2023. The Porbandar, DSP made a proposal to detain the applicant and others under the PBM Act of 1980. The District Magistrate, Porbandar, after considering the entire material supplied by the sponsoring authority, satisfied that with a view to preventing the applicant from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of essential to the community, it is necessary to detain the applicant who derived the gain from the said malpractice, which act of the applicant defeat the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act.

4. In the aforesaid set of circumstances, by exercising powers under Section 3(1) of the PBM Act of 1980, the District Magistrate, Porbandar passed detention order dated 07.02.2024 and the same was executed upon the applicant. The District Magistrate, Porbandar, after consideration the entire circumstances and the documentary evidence was of the opinion that mere registration of the FIR against the detenue would not effectively prev