AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Z.K. Saiyed, J.—By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order of detention dated 05th July 2010 passed by the respondent No. 2 - Commissioner of Police, Rajkot City, under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 at pre-detention stage.
Heard Mr. Yatin Soni, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned Assistant Government Pleader, for the respondent-State.
Mr. Soni, learned Assistant Government Pleader, has submitted that the petitioner was staying at Delhi with his family. The petitioner was owned Bolero Jeep bearing Registration No. HR-55-GT-2720. The petitioner had purchased the said Jeep from Mahindra and Mahindra Company, Gurgaon. He has also submitted that the said Jeep was sold by the petitioner to one Sandeep, son of Jagdish @ Chhotu, resident of District-Rohtak, Haryana for consideration of Rs. 01,00,000/- and rest of the outstanding loan/EMI installments were required to be paid by the said Sandeep, son of Jagdish @ Chhotu. Mr. Soni has also submitted that the petitioner has sold the said Jeep to said Sandeep by entering into Sale Deed dated 28th February 2008 at New Delhi. He has further submitted that one FIR has been registered on 29th November 2009 at the instance of Head Constable of Bhaktinagar Police Station, Rajkot City vide Prohibition C.R. No. 269 of 2009 against three persons. He has further submitted that the police has also seized the Bolero Jeep bearing Registration No. GJ-14-E-5448. Mr. Soni has further submitted that during the investigation it was found that the original registration details of the said Jeep as Registration No. HR-55-GT-2720, which was involved in the offence. During the police investigation, name of the present petitioner was disclosed from the vehicle papers only. The petitioner was not named in the FIR. He has also submitted that in connection of the said offence, Order bearing No. P.C.B./DTN./PASA/84/2010 dated 07th May 2010 was passed by the respondent No. 2 - Commissioner of Police, Rajkot City. Mr. Soni has contended that the petitioner has already sold the Jeep to one Mr. Sandeep. Even, there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the present offence. He therefore, prayed to quash and set aside the said order dated 07th May 2010 passed by the respondent No. 2 at pre-detention stage.
Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned Assistant Government Pleader, has produced order dated 07th May 2010 passed by the respondent No. 2 - Commissioner of Police, Rajkot City and affidavit.
I have perused the papers produced before me as well as submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties. I have also perused the order passed by the respondent No. 2-Police Commissioner, Rajkot City. Looking to the papers produced before me, prima-facie it is established that the petitioner has sold the said Jeep to one Sandeep, son of Jagdish @ Chhotu on 28th February 2008 as per the Sale Deed entered into and therefore, there arises no question of involvement of the petitioner. Hence, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to consider.
In view of the above observations, present petition is allowed and the order dated 07th May 2010 passed by the respondent No. 2 - Commissioner of Police, Rajkot City, bearing No. P.C.B./DTN./PASA.84/2010 is hereby set aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Direct Service is permitted.