Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Narayanbhai Ramjibhai Barot vs State Of Gujarat & 2 on 24 April, 2015

Author: Ks Jhaveri

Bench: Ks Jhaveri

         C/SCA/10135/2012                            ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION  NO. 10135 of 2012
========================================================
         NARAYANBHAI RAMJIBHAI BAROT....Petitioner(s)
                               Versus
             STATE OF GUJARAT  &  2....Respondent(s)
========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOUSAM R YAGNIK, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ­ 3
MR RAKESH PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1
========================================================

         CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
 
                            Date : 24/04/2015
 ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned AGP Mr.Rakesh Patel waives service  of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondents.

2. By   way   of   this   petition,   the   petitioner­detenue  is   apprehending   his   detention   pursuant   to   FIR  being   C.R.No.III­132/2012   with   Vayara   Police  Station, Dist.Surat under Section 66(1)(B), 65(A) (E) and 116(B) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. The  petitioner has preferred present petition at pre­ execution stage to avoid his detention.  

3. I take notice of the fact that the petitioner has  been   detained   as   a  'bootlegger'.   I   also   take  notice of the fact that the detaining authority  has   relied   upon   one   case   registered   with   the  Vyara Police Station vide C.R.No.III­132/2012 for  Page 1 of 5 C/SCA/10135/2012 ORDER the   offence   punishable   under   Section  66(1)(B),  65(A)(E)   and   116(B)   of   the   Bombay   Prohibition  Act.

4. Section   2(b)   of   the   PASA   Act   defines   the   term  'bootlegger', which reads as under:­ "S.2(b)   "bootlegger"   means   a   person   who   distills,   manufactures,   stores,   transports,   imports,   exports,   sells   or   distributes   any   liquor, intoxicating drug or other intoxicant in   contravention   of   any   provision   of   the   Bombay   Prohibition Act, 1949 (Bom.XXV of 1949) and the   rules   and   orders   made   thereunder,   or   of   any   other   law   for   the   time   being   in   force   or   who   knowingly   expends   or   applies   any   money   or   supplies   any   animals,   vehicle,   vessel   or   other   conveyance   or   any   receptacle   or   any   other   material whatsoever in furtherance or support of   the doing of any of the things  described  above   by or through any other person, or who abets in   any other manner the doing of any such thing."

5. Section 3 of the PASA Act speaks about the power  to   make   orders   detaining   certain   persons.   It  reads as under:

"Sec.3   Power   to   make   orders   detaining  certain   persons:
(1)  The  State  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 public order,   it   is   necessary   so   to   do,   make   an   order   directing that such person be detained. (2)   If   having   regard   to   the   circumstances   prevailing   or   likely   to   prevail   in   any   area   within the local limits of the jurisdiction of a   District Magistrate or a Commissioner of Police,   the   State   Government   is   satisfied   that   it   is   Page 2 of 5 C/SCA/10135/2012 ORDER necessary so to do, it may, by order in writing,   direct   that   the   District   Magistrate   or   the   Commissioner   of   Police,   may   also,   if   satisfied   as   provided   in   sub­section   (1),   exercise   the   powers conferred by the said sub­section.
(3) When any order is made under this section by   an authorised officer, he shall forthwith report   the fact to the State Government, together with   the grounds on which the order has been made and   such other particulars as, in his opinion, has 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.
(4)   For   the   purpose   of   this   section,   a   person   shall   be   deemed   to   be   "acting   in   any   manner   prejudicial to the maintenance of public order"  

when   such   person   is   engaged   in   or   is   making   preparation   for   engaging   in   any   activities,   whether  as  a bootlegger  or  dangerous   person  or   drug   offender   or   immoral   traffic   offender   or   property grabber, which affect adversely or are   likely   to   affect   adversely   the   maintenance   of   public order.

Explanation:­   For   the   purpose   of   this   sub­ section,   public   order   shall   be   deemed   to   have   been   affected   adversely   or   shall   be   deemed   likely   to   be   affected   adversely   inter   alia   if  any of the activities of any person referred to   in   this   sub­section   directly   or   indirectly,   is   causing  or is likely  to cause any harm,  danger   or   alarm   or   feeling   of   insecurity   among   the   general public or any section thereof or a grave   or widespread danger to life, property or public   health."

6. In this connection, I may refer to a decision of  the   Supreme   Court   in  Pushker   Mukherjee   v/s.   State of West Bengal [AIR 1970 SC 852], where the  Page 3 of 5 C/SCA/10135/2012 ORDER distinction   between   'law   and   order'   and   'public  order'   has   been   clearly   laid   down.   The   Court  observed as follows:

"Does   the   expression   "public   order"   take   in   every  kind of infraction  of order or only some   categories   thereof  ? It is  manifest  that  every   act   of   assault   or   injury   to   specific   persons   does   not   lead   to   public   disorder.   When   two   people quarrel and fight and assault each other   inside   a  house   or  in  a street,   it  may  be  said   that there is disorder but not public disorder.   Such   cases   are   dealt   with   under   the   powers   vested   in   the   executive   authorities   under   the   provisions   of   ordinary   criminal   law   but   the   culprits  cannot  be  detained  on  the  ground  that   they   were   disturbing   public   order.   The   contravention   of   any   law   always   affects   order   but   before   it   can   be   said   to   affect   public   order,   it   must   affect   the   community   or   the   public at large. In this connection we must draw   a   line   of   demarcation   between   serious   and   aggravated   forms   of   disorder   which   directly   affect   the   community   or   injure   the   public   interest   and   the   relatively   minor   breaches   of   peace   of   a   purely   local   significance   which   primarily   injure   specific   individuals   and   only   in   a   secondary   sense   public   interest.   A   mere   disturbance of law and order leading to disorder   is   thus   not   necessarily   sufficient   for   action   under   the   Preventive   Detention   Act   but   a   disturbance which will affect public order comes   within the scope of the Act."

7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties  and having gone through the grounds of detention,  in my opinion, the detaining authority has failed  to   substantiate   that   the   alleged   antisocial  activities   of   the   petitioner­detenue   adversely  affect   or   are   likely   to   affect   adversely   the  maintenance of public order. Just because a case  Page 4 of 5 C/SCA/10135/2012 ORDER has   been   registered   against   the   petitioner­ detenue   under   the   Prohibition   Act,   by   itself,  does not have any bearing on the maintenance of  public order. The petitioner may be punished for  the   alleged   offences   committed   by   him   but,  surely, the acts constituting the offences cannot  be  said   to  have  affected  the   even  tempo  of  the  life of the community much less public health. It  may   be   that   the   petitioner­detenue   is   a  'bootlegger'   within   the   meaning   of   Section   2(b)  of   the   PASA   Act,   but   merely   because   he   is   a  'bootlegger', he cannot be preventively detained  under the provisions of the PASA Act unless, as  laid down in sub­section (4) of Section 3 of the  PASA Act, his activities as a 'bootlegger' affect  adversely or are likely to affect adversely the  maintenance of public order.

8. In   the   result,   the   petition   is   allowed   and   the  impugned   order   of   detention   is   quashed   and   set  aside.   The   detenue   is   ordered   to   be   set   at  liberty forthwith, if not required in connection  with   any   other   case.   Rule   is   made   absolute  accordingly. Direct service is permitted.

(K.S.JHAVERI, J.)  Tuvar Page 5 of 5