1 wp3657.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No. 3657 of 2010 Gunvanti Bhavarlal Mehta ..Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & anr. ..Respondents Mr. S.N. Raj- advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.P. Adsule – APP for the State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR & A.P. BHANGALE, JJ DATED :- DECEMBER 23, 2010. P.C. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order passed by the Respondent No. 2 dated 30th November, 2010 in exercise of powers under Section 18 and 20 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. The solitary ground on which we are inclined to allow this Petition is that the order on the face of it suffers 2 wp3657.10.sxw from non-application of mind. From the order it is noticed that the Respondent No. 2 has adverted to the enquiry undertaken by his pre- decessor and the material gathered during such enquiry including the opinion formed and the satisfaction recorded by his pre-decessor. After adverting to that the Respondent No. 2 has straightaway proceeded to issue the impugned order. That, in our opinion, is not sufficient. The present incumbent Commissioner of Police who issued the order was expected to record his own satisfaction and not merely place reliance on the subjective satisfaction arrived at by his pre-decessor. The order does not even remotely suggest that the present incumbent Commissioner of Police has also arrived at the same subjective satisfaction. That would have been a different matter. 2. Learned APP in all fairness submits that on reading the order as a whole, it is not possible to state that the present incumbent Commissioner of Police has recorded his own satisfaction which necessitated issuance of the impugned order. On this limited count, the impugned order is set aside. However, it will be open to the Respondent No. 2 to reconsider the matter on the basis of material already available with him or to be made available before passing of the order in exercise of powers under Section 18 and 20 of 3 wp3657.10.sxw the Act of 1956. All questions in that behalf are left open. 3. Petition disposed of on the above terms. (A.P.BHANGALE, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)