Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sachin Parshuram Mane, challenged an order of detention dated 30.06.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Pune City under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Dangerous persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 (MPDA Act). The petitioner was detained in Yerwada Central Prison, Pune. The petitioner's counsel, Ms. Jayshree Tripathi, restricted submissions to grounds (b), (c), and (d) of the petition, arguing that there was a gross delay of about 5 months in passing the detention order from the last incident on 27.01.2021, and that the delay was unexplained. It was further argued that the requirement of Section 3(3) of the MPDA Act for forthwith approval of the detention order was not complied with, and that the petitioner's representation dated 26.08.2021 sent to the Superintendent for forwarding to the State Government was not expeditiously considered, with no communication received till date. The court considered the submissions and the precedents cited, including Pradeep Nilkant Paturakar v. S. Ramamurthi, Sanjeev @ Sanjay @ T.N.Upade v. Commissioner of Police, Solapur, Niyazuddin @ Sonu Ansari v. State of Maharashtra, and Mohsin Ahmed v. State of Maharashtra. The court held that the unexplained delay of 5 months in passing the detention order vitiated the order, and the non-compliance with Section 3(3) regarding forthwith approval and the delay in considering the representation further invalidated the detention. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the detention order and directed the petitioner's release unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Unexplained Delay - Section 3, Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Dangerous persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 - Delay of about 5 months in passing detention order from last incident on 27.01.2021 to order dated 30.06.2021 held unexplained and fatal - Court quashed detention order relying on precedents that unexplained delay vitiates detention (Paras 1-2). B) Preventive Detention - Forthwith Approval - Section 3(3), Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Dangerous persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 - Requirement of forthwith approval not complied with - Delay in approval renders detention order invalid (Para 2.2). C) Preventive Detention - Representation Delay - Article 22(5), Constitution of India - Petitioner's representation dated 26.08.2021 not forwarded expeditiously to State Government - Unexplained delay in consideration of representation violates constitutional safeguard (Para 2.2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned detention order under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders, Dangerous persons and Video Pirates Act, 1981 is vitiated due to unexplained delay in passing the order and non-compliance with Section 3(3) of the Act.
Final Decision
The court quashed and set aside the impugned order of detention bearing No. D. O. No. PCB/DET/1480/2021 dated 30.06.2021 and directed the petitioner to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Preventive detention
- Unexplained delay
- Forthwith approval
- Representation delay
- MPDA Act
