IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 8334 of 2004 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- JAHIR ISMAIL FAKIR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 8334 of 2004 MS SUBHADRA G PATEL for Petitioner No. 1 MS PUNANI, AGP, for Respondent No. 1-3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH Date of decision: 06/12/2004 ORAL JUDGEMENT Heard Ms Subhadra Patel for the petitioner and learned AGP Ms Punani for the other side. The petitioner is permitted to correct the name in the cause title of the petition. 2. By invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 read with Article 21 and 22(5) of the Constitution of India, the petitioner - detenu has challenged the legality and validity of the order of detention No.PCB/DTN/PASA/35/2004 dated 17th May, 2004 passed against him by the Police Commissioner, Rajkot City, branding the petitioner as a dangerous person within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the conferred on him by Section 3(2) of The Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the PASA Act). 3. It is submitted by Mrs Patel, learned advocate for the petitioner, that the present petitioner is a co-detenu of the petitioner of Special Civil Application No.6533 of 2004 who has been set at liberty today while allowing the said petition. The affidavit-in-reply submitted by learned AGP, Mrs Punani from Commissioner of Police, Rajkot City, is taken on record and I have considered the stand taken by the detaining authority justifying the detention. 4. The case of the petitioner stands on a better footing than the petitioner of Special Civil Application No.6533 of 2004 because his involvement, even as per the grounds conveyed to the present petitioner-detenu, he was found to be involved in two cases as against the involvement of the petitioner of SCA No.6533 of 2004 in three criminal cases. The statements recorded by the sponsoring authority are just similar and they are practically copies of the statements which were considered by this Court in Special Civil Application No.6533 of 2004. Therefore, adopting the reasons assigned by the Court while allowing Special Civil Application No.6533 of 2004, this petition can be allowed. On the contrary, this petitioner would be entitled to take one more point of that of parity. It is not necessary to reproduce the reasons mechanically. The Registry can be directed to place a copy of the order of Special Civil Application No.6533 of 2004 in the file of the present petition. Reasons that have been assigned by this Court for allowing the said petition may be considered as reasons assigned by the Court in the present petition as well. The petition is accordingly allowed. 5 During the course of oral submissions, when certain queries were raised to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mrs Patel has fairly accepted that the petitioner is ready to stay outside limits of Rajkot taluka for a reasonable period i.e. for a period of six months i.e. upto 30th April, 2005 so that the petitioner may not have to face any further externment proceedings. The Court accepts the voluntary statement made on behalf of the petitioner by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs Patel, and now in compliance with the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner the petitioner shall not enter the limits of City and Taluka of Rajkot City till 30th April, 2005. The authority can monitor the compliance of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner today on behalf of the petitioner. 6 For the reasons aforesaid, this petition is allowed. Impugned order of detention dated 17th May, 2004 passed by Commissioner of Police, Rajkot, is hereby quashed and set aside and detenu is hereby ordered to be set at liberty forthwith if he is not required to be detained in any other case. Rule is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted. [C. K. BUCH, J] *mohd