Pushkar Mukherjee & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal on 7 November, 1968
18. In the instant case, the detaining authority, in
our opinion, has failed to substantiate that the
alleged anti- social activities of the petitioner
adversely affect or are likely to affect adversely the
maintenance of public order. It is true some
incidents of beating by the petitioner had taken
place, as alleged by the witnesses. But, such
incidents, in our view, do 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. It may be that the
petitioner is a bootlegger within the meaning of
section 2(b) of the Act, but merely because he is a
age 5 of 6
Uploaded by MR.MAHENDRA MOHANBHAI PUROHIT(HCD0074) on Tue Aug 12 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Aug 12 22:26:26 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10883/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/08/2025
undefined
bootlegger he cannot be preventively detained
under the provisions of the Act unless, as laid down
in sub-section (4) of section 3 of the Act, his
activities as a bootlegger affect adversely or are
likely to affect adversely the maintenance of public
order We have carefully considered the offences
alleged against the petitioner in the order of
detention and also the allegations made by the
witnesses and, in our opinion, these offences or the
allegations cannot be said to have created any
feeling of insecurity or panic or terror among the
members of the public of the area in question giving
rise to the question of maintenance of public order.
The order of detention cannot, therefore, be
upheld."