Detention orders must be issued promptly; significant delays without new evidence render them illegal, violating Article 22(5) of the Constitution.

JUDGMENT :

ILESH J. VORA, J.

1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner – Parash Kishorbhai Sachadev, has challenged the order dated 07.02.2024 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 employed as a outsource Computer Operator to look after the affairs of essential commodities and its distribution under the jurisdiction of District Porbandar, State of Gujarat. The essential commodities like wheat, rise, etc. Essential to the community to be supplied through Public Distribution System (“PDS” for short), had been stored in different godowns under the jurisdiction of Porbandar District. The applicant was in charge of issuing on-line gate pass etc. The Government noticed some irregularities in the stock maintained at the godown place. It is alleged that during 01.01.2020 to 04.01.2023, the applicant along with the other state government employees in connivance with the transporters and other persons misappropriated the huge stocks of food grains of Rs.99,77,551/- for their personal gains which has directly affect the supply of essential commodities. 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 arrested on 28.01.2023 and later on he was enlarged on bail. 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 prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of food grains and further, opined that after releasing on bail, it quite possible that the detenue will continue with the illegal and antisocial activities and it is imperative for the effective measures to detain the applicant preventing him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of essentially commodities.

5. The detention order dated 07.02.2024 was intimated to the State Government along with the grounds on which the order was made and the State Government has approved the order impugned. The Central Government vide communication dated 19.02.2024 was also informed along with the grounds of detention, etc.

6. Being aggrieved with the order impugned dated 07.02.2024, the present application has been filed.

7. We have heard learned counsel Mr. Rohan Vaghela for the applicant and Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned APP for the respondent – State.

8. Mr. Vaghela, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of the applicant detenue, made the fol