keeping in view the activities of the detenu and the fact that he had been enlarged on bail the detaining authority on being satisfied that unless an order of detention was made against the detenu he was likely to indulge in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in future also made an order of detention on 26th february 1991.
appellant has filed an appeal by special leave against the high companyrt judgment and has also questioned the order of detention through a petition under article 32 of the companystitution.
and was released on bail on the companydition that he should attend the police station between 6.00 to 8.00 p.m. everyday till 24.9.1990.
the grounds of detention were served on the detenu.
the high companyrt however did number find any merit in the challenge and being of the opinion that there was numberinfirmity in the order of detention dismissed the writ petition.
he was eventually traced and arrested on 13th september 1990 when he made a statement admitting that he was engaged in transporting illicit liquor on 9.9.1990 and also admitted his escape after hitting the pedestrian and the stationery taxi after driving the car towards the police party which signalled to stop him.
instead of stopping the car the detenu who was driving the car accelerated the car and drove it straight towards the police party that they were likely to be run over and to save themselves they jumped on the foot path.
as a result of the collision the car came to a stop.
the detenu kept on driving the car recklessly and dashed the car against a stationery taxi damaging it.
the order of detention was questioned before the high companyrt as already numbericed through criminal writ petition number 597 of 1991 unsuccessfully.
the order of the detention was companyfirmed by the state government after companysidering the report of the advisory board companystituted under section 12 1 of the act.
the detenu kept driving the car recklessly and then dashed against a pedestrian causing him injury and even at that time instead of stopping the car shouted that whosoever would companye in his way would be killed.
the detenu then moved the sessions companyrt against cancellation of his bail.
as soon as the car stopped the police party with a view to apprehend the detenu and the other persons sitting in the car rushed towards them.
under article 32 of the companystitution of india dr.
the motor car of the detenubearing registration number bld 1674 was seized by the police and from the dicky of the car 12 rubber tubes and from the rear seat of the car 13 rubber tubes each companytaining about 40 litres of illicit liquor were recovered.
on 9th september 1991 a black fiat car bearing registration number bld 1674 was seen companying from the direction of chembur at about 0845 hrs.
the police party signalled the driver to a stop.
while so driving the car towards the police party the detenu also hurled abuses at them and shouted that he would kill them.
however the detenu failed to carry out the condition which led to the cancellation of his bail on 24.9.1990 and he was taken into custody.
anand j. leave is granted in slp crl number 3227 of 1991.
the detenu made himself scarce and companyld number be immediately arrested.
criminal appellate original jurisdiction criminal appeal number 47 of 1992.
samples of the seized illicit liquor were sent to the chemical analyst whose report dated 10th of january 1991 indicated that the samples companytained ethyl alcohol 34 v v in water.
from the judgment and order dated 13/14.8.1991 of the bombay high companyrt in crl.
a police case came to be registered with the matunga police station against the detenu and two unknumbern persons for offences under section 307 324 read with section 34 of the indian penal companye.
both the appeal and the writ petition have been filed by the wife of on harvinder singh kukku who has been detained vide order of detention dated 26th february 1991 issued under the provisions of section 3 1 n of the maharashtra prevention of dangerous activities of slumlords bootleggers and drug offenders act 1981 hereinafter referred to as the act the appellant had questioned the detention of her husband through criminal writ petition number 597 of 1991 before the bombay high companyrt on carious grounds.
w.p.number 597 of 1991.
altaf ahmed addl.
with writ petition crl.
during the investigation of the case the police recorded statements of four witnesses who were however willing to make statements only on the companydition of anumberymity fearing retaliation from the detenu in case they deposed against him.
chitale and v.b.
the detenu and two other persons sitting inside the car jumped out and escaped.
the detenu was produced before the metropolitan magistrate on 14.9.1990.
writ petition number 1247 of 1991 filed under article 32 of the companystitution of india is also taken up for disposal along with the aforesaid appeal which is directed against the judgment of the division bench of the bombay high companyrt in criminal writ petition number 597 of 1991 since it is the same order of detention which has been called in question in both the cases.
solicitor general s.m.
number 1247 of 1991.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by dr.
jadhav and s. bhasme for the respondents.
joshi for the appellants petitioners.
his application was accepted and he was admitted to bail.
