Vishal Vijay Sonawane v. The District Magistrate,Jalgaon And Others
2023:BHC-AUG:27349-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 998 OF 2023 Vishal Vijay Sonawne Age: 27 years, Occ. Agril., R/o.: At Farshi Road, Amalner, Tq. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon.
... Petitioner
Versus
1.
District Magistrate Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.
2.
The State of Maharashtra, Through the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai- 32.
3.
The Jail Superintendent, Central Prison, Nagpur, Dist. Nagpur.
... Respondents ...
Mr. H. F. Pawar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. V. K. Kotecha, APP for Respondents.
...
CORAM :
R. G. AVACHAT and SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE :
05th December, 2023.
O R D E R: (Per Sanjay A. Deshmukh, J.) Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India against order of detention dated 15th March, 2023 passed by respondent No.1 under Section 3(2) 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 (for short "M.P.D.A. Act").
The petitioner is detained as per the order of respondent No.1, which was confirmed by respondent No.2 on the ground that the petitioner is a dangerous person. For that purpose, respondent No.1 has relied upon the following crimes:
जळगा जिजल्ह्याती अमळने पो ी स्टेशन नाशिशक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीयेथेदाख गुन्ह्यांचीमाहि"ती अ क्र पो ी गुन्"ादाख
हिदनांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती गुनं क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म अटक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीहिदनांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीद्यस्थिस्थती स्टेशन अमळने 07.09.2027 187/17 भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म326, 323, 504, 506, 34 " आम( अॅक्ट4/25 07.11.2017 न्यायप्रहिष्ठ अमळने 10.01.2018 08/2018 भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म307, 394 07.11.2017 नाशाबीत अमळने 28.05.2018 110/18 भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म307, 143, 147, 13.05.2018 नाशाबीत मुंबई नाकानाक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीा 20.08.2018 249/18 भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म392, 34 17.09.2018 न्यायप्रहिष्ठ नाशिशक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीश" उपनग पोस्टे 09.09.2018 333/18 भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म379, 34 23.12.2022 न्यायप्रहिष्ठ नाशिशक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती अमळने 03.10.2019 390/2019 भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म384, 363, 342, 323, 504, 506 " आम( अॅक्ट 3/25, 4/25 03.10.2019 एन.ो.
फायन
अमळने 11.04.2020 CCTNS भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म143, 147, 148, 149, 295, " आम( अॅक्ट3/25 12.04.2020 नाशाबीत NO.219/20 अमळने 13.09.2020 CCTNS 13.09.2020 न्यायप्रहिष्ठ मुंबई नाकापो ी अधि3हिनयम1951 चे क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म142 प्रमाणे NO.555/20 अमळने 12.04.2021 CCTNS भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म354, 323, 504, 506, 427 अटक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीना"ी एन.ो.
फायन
NO.168/21
अमळने 10.06.2021 CCTNS 11.06.2021 न्यायप्रहिष्ठ भादंहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म143, 147, 148, 149, 294, 427, 504, 506 NO.246/21 अमळने 23.12.2021 CCTNS भादहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म307, 143, 147, 148, 149 " आम( अॅक्ट 3/25,27 24.12.2021 न्यायप्रहिष्ठ NO.554/21 अमळने पो ी स्टेशनजिजजळगा येथी प्रधितबं3ात्मक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीाय(ा"ीचातपशिश
अ.क्र पो ी स्टेशनचेना दाख हिदनांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती जिजष्ट क्रमांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म अमळने 16.09.2018 340/2018 फौजदाीप्रहिक्रयांहि"ता1973 चेक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म 107 प्रमाणे अमळने 17.04.2020 52/2020 फौजदाीप्रहिक्रयांहि"ता1973 चेक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म 100 (ई नाका) (ग) प्रमाणे अमळने 04.09.2021 216/2021 फौजदाीप्रहिक्रयांहि"ता1973 चेक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म 100 (ई नाका) (ग) प्रमाणे अमळने 09.11.2022 191/2022 फौजदाीप्रहिक्रयांहि"ता1973 चेक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म 107 प्रमाणे अमळने पो ी स्टेशनजिजजळगा येथी अदख पात्र गुन्ह्याचा तपशिलगुन्ह्याचातपशिश
अ.क्र पो ी स्टेशनचे ना दाख हिदनांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती गुनं क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म अमळने 06.11.2022 1053/2022 भादहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म405, 506, 510 अमळने 22.01.2023 0066/2023 भादहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म323, 504, 506 अमळने 04.02.2023 0099/2023 भादहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म504, 506, 427 अमळने श" पो ी स्टेशनजिजजळगा अंतग(तक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीण्यातआ ेल्या"द्दपा क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीााई नाकाचातपशिश
अ.क्र पो ी स्टेशनचेना क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म अमळने श" उपहिभागीयदंडाधि3क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीाीअमळने भागअमळने जिजजळगा यांचेक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीडी आदेशक्रमांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती"द्दपा प्रस्ता क्रमांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती06/2019, हिदनांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती 03/10/2019 अन्येचोपडा, पाोळा, अमळने 3ुळेता ुक्यातून01 र्षाा(क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीीता"द्दपा क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीण्यातआ े ेआ"े.
अ ीक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहितीडी महि"न्याच्याआतदाख गुन्ह्याचातपशिश
अ क्र पो ी गुन्"ादाख
हिदनांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती गुनं क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म अटक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती हिदनांक येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती द्यस्थिस्थती स्टेशन अमळने 02.11.2022 CCTNS NO.506/22 भादहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म324, 143, 147, 149, 504, 506, 500 03.11.2022 तपाा अमळने 26.01.2023 CCTNS NO.0028/2023 04.02.2023 तपाा भादहि क येथे दाखल गुन्ह्यांची माहिती म394, 323, 504,
The in-camera statements of two witnesses are also relied upon, which were recorded on 31st January, 2023 and 1st February, 2023. The detaining authority came to the conclusion that the petitioner is a dangerous person as defined under the M.P.D.A. Act and passed the impugned order. The order was confirmed by the Advisory Committee.
The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the following grounds:
I) The petitioner is falsely detained due to some political rivalry without any justifiable ground for subjective satisfaction. The order is passed mechanically and in very casual manner.
II) There is no substance in the in-camera statements of witnesses 'A' and 'B' to arrive at a subjective satisfaction. Neither the detaining authority verified it nor the remarks have been put under it, that it is satisfied upon reading those statements that the petitioner is dangerous person as defined under Section 2(b-1) and 2(e-2) of the M.P.D.A. Act.
III) The two crimes registered against the petitioner for sand
smuggling are not establishing to have effect on public order. The detaining authority did not apply its mind and arrive at subjective satisfaction while passing order. The detaining authority did not consider the status of other crimes and it also failed to consider that in crimes bearing CCTNS No.506 of 2022 and CCTNS No.28 of 2023, the petitioner is released on bail. The said orders are not challenged by the respondents. The detaining authority relied upon old and stale cases, which have no nexus and proximity with the purpose of detention order. The learned counsel for petitioner pointed out that though the alleged two crimes are relied upon by respondent No.1 bearing CCTNS No.506 of 2022 and CCTNS No.
28 of 2023 are alleged to have been occurred within six months, are not establishing that the petitioner is a dangerous person and his activities are affecting the maintenance of public order. He further pointed out that the in-camera statements of the witnesses also do not establish that because of the overt acts of the petitioner, maintenance of public order is likely to be affected. The learned counsel for petitioner lastly submitted that the impugned order passed by the authority relying upon those two crimes and two in-camera statements of the witnesses, is without subjective satisfaction having no proximity with the alleged detention.
prayed to allow the petition by quashing and setting aside the impugned order.
The learned APP for the State strongly opposed the petition and submitted that the authorities have rightly believed the two in-camera statements of the witnesses and the alleged two crimes. He pointed out the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent No.1, in which it is averred that after verifying the in-camera statements of the witnesses and those two crimes, the authorities have subjectively satisfied and the detention order is passed, as the petitioner is found to be a dangerous person and his activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. It is lastly prayed to dismiss the petition. Perused the impugned order and all the documents. The crime bearing CCTNS No.506 of 2022 is registered on 2nd November, 2022 and the crime bearing CCTNS No.28 of 2023 is registered on 26th January, 2023.
The impugned order is passed on 15th March, 2023. Admittedly, the petitioner was released on bail in those two cases and those bail orders are not challenged by the respondents. Thus, it shows that there is no live link between those two crimes for passing of the impugned order to show that petitioner is dangerous person.
The in-camera statements of the witnesses show allegations of general nature and not specifying a specific date and time of incidents stated therein. While verifying those statements, the detaining authority has not concluded and observed that because of such overt acts of the petitioner, there is likelihood of disturbance of maintenance of public order. Thus, respondent No.1 wrongly came to the conclusion that the petitioner is a dangerous person and his activities are causing obstruction to the maintenance of public order and will also cause obstruction to the public order in future. There is no live link between those two crimes and the alleged maintenance of public order. It is sufficient to hold that the impugned order is not legal and correct. Therefore, the impugned order requires to be quashed and set aside. The criminal writ petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following order:-
O R D E R
I.
The criminal writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause "B".
II.
The petitioner be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.
[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] [ R. G. AVACHAT, J. ] nga