IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 402 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE ============================================================ 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 Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- AHSANKHAN SAMIULLAHKHAN PATHAN Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 402 of 2002 MR MM TIRMIZI for Petitioner No. 1 MR D.P. JOSHI, AGP for Respondent State -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE Date of decision: 18/02/2002 ORAL JUDGEMENT The petitioner came to be detained by virtue of an order 19.10.2001 passed by the learned District Magistrate, Bharuch in exercise of powers under Section 3 of the PASA Act. The petitioner seeks to challenge the said order by this petition under Article 226 of the of Constitution of India. 2. The grounds of detention indicate that the petitioner has been branded as a boot-legger. The detaining authority has considered four registered offences against the detenu under the Bombay Prohibition Act. The detaining authority has also considered statements of three anonymous witnesses and have come to the conclusion that the activity of the detenu is anti-social and detrimental to public health and public order. 3. The only ground that is canvassed by learned Advocate Mr. Tirmizi for the petitioner is that a representation was made on behalf of detenu on 10.12.2001 and the same came to be rejected by the Government on 16.12.2001. The said representation was accompanied by affidavits controverting the incidents narrated by anonymous witnesses. He submitted that the deponent in that affidavit has controverted the allegations made by the anonymous witnesses. It was therefore expected of the Government to whom the representation was made, to ascertain the correctness of the statements by cross-checking. This exercise is not undertaken and therefore it would virtually be non-consideration of the representation and therefore the right of the detenu is infringed. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. D.P. Joshi has opposed to this petition. 5. Having regard to the rival side contentions, it is amply clear that the representation made on behalf of the detenu to the Government on 10.12.2001 was accompanied by affidavits, wherein it was in terms stated that no incident had occurred as stated by the anonymous witnesses. It was incumbent upon the Government to have verified the version given by the anonymous witnesses as well as these deponents, which go contrary to each other and to consider the incidents narrated by the anonymous witnesses were correct or not. Non-consideration of this can be said to have rejected the petitioner's representation mechanically. This would affect the right of the petitioner of making an effective representation and in turn his continued detention would be vitiated. The petition therefore deserves to be allowed. 6. The petition is therefore, allowed. Order of detention dated 19th October, 2001 passed by the learned District Magistrate, Bharuch is quashed and set aside. Detenu Ahsankhan Samiullakhan Pathan be released from detention forthwith, if not required in any other case. Rule made absolute. No costs. Direct service permitted. (A.L.Dave,J.) */Mohandas