IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 8952 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR ============================================================ 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? -------------------------------------------------------------- KAMLABEN @ KANI W/O MANGALBHAIBABUBHAI MALI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 8952 of 2002 MS JAYSHREE C BHATT for Petitioner No. 1 MR MK PATEL, AGP for Respondent No. 1-3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR Date of decision: 21/03/2003 ORAL JUDGEMENT #. By filing this petition the petitioner-detenu has challenged the detention order dated 5.8.2002, by which, she is detained under the provisions of the Gujarat Prevention of Antisocial Activities Act, 1985 (for short "PASA") as a "bootlegger". #. Along with the detention order, she was served with the grounds of detention of the same date. In the said grounds, there is a reference about five criminal cases, which are filed against the detenu under the Bombay Prohibition Act. The detaining authority, after having been satisfied about illegal activities of the detenu, has passed the aforesaid detention order. The said detention order is challenged by the petitioner-detenu on various grounds. #. At the time of hearing of this petition, learned advocate for the petitioner has relied upon the fact that the last offence against the petitioner was registered on 4.7.2002 and the detention order is passed on 5.8.2002. It is submitted that there is a delay of one month in passing the detention order. It is submitted that if really the activities of the petitioner are so dangerous, it was not necessary to wait for such a long time. The said ground is taken by way of amendment in the petition. However, there is no explanation explaining the said delay. In this connection, reference is required to be made to the judgment of this Court (Coram: H.K.Rathod,J) given in Special Civil Application No.13125 of 2000 wherein this Court has considered the aspect of delay in passing the detention order. This Court in para 9 has observed as under : "In light of the observations made by this Court in two decisions and considering the facts that there was one month delay in passing the detention order from the last offence registered on 5th October, 2000 which remained unexplained and non-supply of the relevant documents which had been taken into account by the detaining authority while passing the detention order and in spite of the demand made by the petitioner, the same have not been supplied and therefore, it adversely affected the legal and fundamental rights of the detenu for making effective representation under Art.22(5) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the order of detention dated 6th November, 2000 is required to be set aside." #. The facts of this case are also similar so far as unexplained delay of one month is concerned. In that view of the matter and considering the judgment referred to above, this petition is allowed. The order of detention dated 5.8.2002 is quashed and set aside. The detenu Kamlaben @ Kani w/o Mangalbhai Babarbhai Mali is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith if she is not required in connection with any other case. Rule is made absolute accordingly. (P.B.Majmudar,J) (pathan)