Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Premchand @ Babu Punjabi @ Tatu Manohar Dhakani, was detained under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Dangerous Persons, Video Pirates, Sand Smugglers and Persons Engaged in Black Marketing of Essential Commodities Act, 1981 (MPDA Act) by an order dated 24.08.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Thane. The petitioner was lodged at Nashik Road Central Prison, Nashik. Upon receipt of the detention order, the petitioner submitted a representation to the State Government on 07.12.2021 through the jail authorities for consideration and revocation of the order. However, the representation remained unattended for more than three months, and the petitioner received no communication from the State Government. The petitioner then filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court seeking quashing of the detention order and release. The petitioner's counsel argued that the detention order was passed with total non-application of mind and that the inordinate delay in considering the representation violated the petitioner's constitutional right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The court, after hearing both sides, found that the representation had not been acted upon and remained unattended, causing undue delay and continuation of detention. The court held that such delay vitiates the detention order. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the detention order and directed the petitioner's release forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Delay in Considering Representation - Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India - The petitioner's representation dated 07.12.2021 against the detention order was not considered by the State Government for over three months, resulting in undue delay and continuation of detention. Held that such delay vitiates the detention order as it infringes the constitutional right under Article 22(5) to have the representation considered expeditiously. (Paras 5-7) B) Preventive Detention - Non-Application of Mind - Section 3 of MPDA Act, 1981 - The detention order was passed with total non-application of mind by the detaining authority. The representation remained unattended with jail authorities for more than three months, indicating lack of proper consideration. Held that the order is liable to be quashed. (Paras 5-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the detention order under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Dangerous Persons, Video Pirates, Sand Smugglers and Persons Engaged in Black Marketing of Essential Commodities Act, 1981 (MPDA Act) is liable to be quashed due to inordinate delay in considering the petitioner's representation.
Final Decision
The court quashed and set aside the detention order bearing No. TC/PD/DO/MPDA/02/2021 dated 24.08.2021 and directed the petitioner's release forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Preventive detention
- delay in considering representation
- Article 22(5) of Constitution
- non-application of mind
- MPDA Act 1981 Section 3
