Gujarat High Court
Samirkumar Shankarbhai Chauhan Thro ... vs State Of Gujarat on 20 June, 2025
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/8076/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 8076 of 2025
==========================================================
SAMIRKUMAR SHANKARBHAI CHAUHAN THRO SHANKARBHAI
UDABHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HR PRAJAPATI(674) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS NISHKA H PRAJAPATI(10717) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS CM SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 20/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner - Samirkumar Shankarbhai Chauhan has challenged the order dated 03.06.2025 passed by the respondent - District Magistrate, Panchmahal 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 Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Tue Jun 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 24 21:51:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8076/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2025 undefined applicant detenue is the fair price shop owner having licence to do business in the essential commodities, allegedly granted by the State Government. The place of the business is at Ambali, Tal.: Godhra, Dist.: Panchmahal. The surprise inspection was carried out by the District Supply Officer. During the inspection, it was noticed that, as per the supply of the State Government, the stock was not tallied with the online data. The detenue failed to supply the distribution of commodities to the card holder as per their entitlement and with a view to making gain, took the thumb impression of the 75 card holders and did not supply sufficient stock of commodities as per their entitlement, whereby he acted prejudicial to the maintenance of supply to the commodities essential to the commodities which action defeat or tend to defeat the provisions of Essential Commodities Act and rules thereunder.
4. In the aforesaid set of circumstances, by exercising powers under Section 3(1) of the PBM Act of 1980, the District Magistrate, Panchmahal passed detention order and the same was executed upon the applicant. At the time of execution, the grounds for the detention along with the material relied by the authority concerned has been provided to the detenue.
5. The present petition is directed against the order of Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Tue Jun 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 24 21:51:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8076/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2025 undefined the detention.
6. We have heard learned counsel Mr.H.R. Prajapati for the applicant and Ms.C.M. Shah, learned APP for the respondent - State.
7. Mr.H.R. Prajapati, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of the applicant detenue, has submitted that while passing the detention order, the authority has not assigned reasons for the subjective satisfaction that filing of a complaint against the petitioner and suspension of licence are not sufficient enough and the stringent action against him necessary. In support of his submissions, reliance has been place on the case of Trikambhai Kalabhai Vs. State of Gujarat (Civil Application No.10367 of 2018, dated 17.10.2018). In such circumstances, it is submitted that the order impugned has been passed in a mechanical manner and in violation of fundamental right of the applicant, as enshrined under the Constitution of India and thus, it deserves to be set aside.
8. On the other hand, opposing the application, learned State Counsel Ms.C.M. Shah would urge that during the inspection, huge deficiency in the stock of the essential commodities was noticed by the authority and at the end of the inquiry, it was found that the applicant sold the Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Tue Jun 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 24 21:51:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8076/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2025 undefined deficit stock of foodgrains in the open market for its personal gains, whereby he has committed the offence of Essential Commodities Act, and applicable control order and the said activity would directly bearing on the supply of essential commodities and therefore, considering the material placed before the detaining authority, he was satisfied that with a view to preventing the applicant from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies essential to the community, it is necessary to detain him.
9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the issue falls for our consideration is as to whether the order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, in exercise of his power under the provisions of the PBM Act, 1980 is sustainable in law?
10. Before adverting to the submissions, we may refer to Section 3 of the Act, which authorized the authority to pass an order of detention. Section 3 reads as under:
3. Power to make orders detaining certain persons.-- (1) The Central Government or a State Government or any officer of the Central Government, not below the rank of a Joint Secretary to that Government specially empowered for the purposes of this section by that Government, or any officer of a Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Tue Jun 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 24 21:51:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8076/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2025 undefined State Government, not below the rank of a Secretary to that Government specially empowered for the purposes of this section by that Government, may, if satisfied, with respect to any person that with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of the commodities essential to the community it is necessary so to do, make an order directing that such person be detained.
Explanation.--For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community" means-
(a) committing or instigating any person to commit any offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955) or under any other law for the time being in force relating to the control of the production, supply or distribution of, or trade and commerce in, any commodity essential to the community; or
(b) dealing in any commodity--
(i) which is an essential commodity as defined in the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955), or Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Tue Jun 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 24 21:51:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8076/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2025 undefined
(ii) with respect to which provisions have been made in any such other law as is referred to in clause (a), with a view to making gain in any manner which may directly or indirectly defeat or tend to defeat the provisions of that Act or other law aforesaid.
(2) Any of the following officers, namely:--
(a) district magistrates;
(b) Commissioners of Police, wherever they have been appointed, may also if satisfied as provided in sub-section (1), exercise the powers conferred by the said sub-
section.
(3) When any order is made under this section by an officer mentioned in sub-section (2) he shall forthwith report the fact to the State Government to which he is subordinate together with the grounds on which the order has been made and such other particulars as in his opinion have a bearing on the matter, and no such order shall remain in force for more than twelve days after the making thereof unless in the meantime it has been approved by the State Government:
Provided that where under section 8 the grounds of detention are communicated by the Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Tue Jun 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 24 21:51:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8076/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2025 undefined authority making the order after five days but not later than ten days from the date of detention, this sub-section shall apply subject to the modification that for the words "twelve days", the words "fifteen days" shall be substituted.
(4) When any order is made or approved by the State Government under this section or when any order is made under this section by an officer of the State Government not below the rank of Secretary to that Government specially empowered under sub-section (1) the State Government shall, within seven days, report the fact to the Central Government together with the grounds on which the order has been made and such other particulars as, in the opinion of the State Government, have a bearing on the necessity for the order.
11. In light of the statutory provision and considering the grounds for detention, we are of the considered opinion that the detention passed is based upon the inspection and irregularities as referred in the papers being found. The criminal case under the provisions of Essential Commodities Act has not been filed nor the licence has been suspended by the authority. In other words, straightaway the stringent provisions have been invoked by the authority. Nothing being found from the papers that Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Tue Jun 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 24 21:51:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8076/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/06/2025 undefined before passing the order, the officer concerned failed to observe that the complaint or suspension of licence are not sufficient enough to prevent the activities of the petitioner. Therefore, in our opinion, the subjective satisfaction on the issue as referred is completely missing in the present case and in casually, stringent powers of detention was being exercised which clearly established the non-application of mind on the part of the authority while arriving at the subjective satisfaction that the order of detention is necessary in order to prevent the activities of the applicant.
12. In light of the above discussions, we have no hesitation in quashing the order of detention on the ground as discussed above, as the detention order has become illegal for violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and accordingly, present petition is allowed and the order of detention dated 03.06.2025 is hereby quashed. We direct the detenue to be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required in any other case. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct service permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) (P. M. RAVAL, J) Rakesh Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by RAKESH M KOSHTI(HC00950) on Tue Jun 24 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jun 24 21:51:47 IST 2025