Sharavan @ Rahul Ashok Burungale v. State of Maharashtra

1) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has impugned the Detention Order dated 22nd November 2024, bearing OW. NO./CRIME PCB/DET/PARVATI/BURUNGALE/950/2024, issued by the Respondent No.2, i.e. Commissioner of Police, Pune, 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 Essential Commodities Act, 1981 (Maha.Act No.LV of 1981) (Amendment-1996, 2009, 2015) (for short “MPDA Act” ) and the Committal Order of even date, thereby detaining him in the Nashik Road Central Prison, Nashik.

2) Heard Mr. Latpate, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Gavand, learned APP for the Respondent, State. Perused entire record produced before us.

3) The principal ground raised in the present Petition for impugning the Detention Order dated 22nd November 2024 is that, there is vast variance / discrepancy in the English version and vernacular Marathi version of the Grounds of Detention served upon the Petitioner along with the Detention Order, which created confusion in the mind of the Petitioner and therefore his right to file a proper and effective representation with the concerned Authority is impaired, which ultimately resulted into violation of his right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India.

3.1) The impugned Detention Order is based on one crime i.e. C.R. No. 302 of 2024, registered with Parvati Police Station, Pune City under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita & under Section 142 of the Maharashtra Police Act, against the Petitioner and two in-camera statements of witnesses. The Detaining Authority after perusing the record submitted by the Sponsoring Authority has come to the conclusion that, the Petitioner is a ‘dangerous person’ as contemplated under Section 2 (b-1) of the MPDA Act and therefore the impugned Order dated 22nd November 2024, is issued under Section 3(2) of the MPDA Act.

3.2) It be noted here that, in the said C.R. No. 302 of 2024, the Petitioner was arrested on 20th September 2024 and was behind bars. The Detention Order was served on him on 23rd November 2024. The Petitioner was released on bail by the Court of competent jurisdiction on 27th December 2024, under Section 187(3) of the BNSS, as the Investigating Agency could not complete the investigation of the said crime within the stipulated period under the law.

3.3) Perusal of the record indicates that, the grounds of detention served upon the Petitioner are in English language and also in vernacular Marathi language.

3.4) In the English version of the grounds of detention, the Detaining Authority, in para No. 8, has stated as under: “8. …………. Presently, your bail application is allowed by the concerned Hon’ble Court, Pune in the offences of 1) Parvati Police Station, Pune C.R. No. 302/2024, u/s 109(1), of BNS & u/s 142 of MPA In view of your tendencies and inclinations reflected in the offence committed by you as stated above as well as the incidents recorded in the ‘In- Camera’ statements, I am further satisfied that after availing bail facility and becoming a free person, you again are likely to revert to similar activities. These are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in future and it is necessary to detain you under the said Act to prevent you from acting in such prejudicial manner in future.”

3.5) However in the vernacular Marathi version of the grounds of detention, in para No. 8, has stated as under: “८. सद्यस्थि तीत तुम्हांला १) पर्वती पोलीस टेशन गुन्हा रजि नंबर ३०२/२०२४, बीएनएस अWक्ट कलम १०९(१) सह मपोका कलम १४२ या गुन्ह्यात तुम्हाला अटक करण्यात आली असून सध्या न्यायालयीन कोठडीमध्ये आहात. प्र तुत गुन्हा हा देहदंडाची अ र्वा आ न्म कारार्वासाची शिशक्षा होण्या इतपत गंभीर नसल्याने तुम्हांला सर्वसामान्य कायद्या नुसार भविर्वष्यात ामीन मं ूर होण्याची शक्यता आहे. तुम्ही र्वर नमूद क े लेल्या गुन्ह्यांमध्ये तसेच गोपनीय बाबामध्ये नोंद क े लेल्या घटना यामध्ये तुमची प्रर्वृत्ती र्व कल पाहता माझे आणखीन समाधान झाले आहे की, तुम्ही भविर्वष्यात अशाच प्रकारचे गुन्हेगारी क ृ त्ये करण्याकडे तुमचा पुन्हा कल राहणार असून त्यामुळे भविर्वष्यात सार्व विनक सुव्यर्व ेस बाधा होणार आहे आशिण म्हणून, भविर्वष्यात अशा त-हेने सार्व विनक सुव्यर्व ेस बाधा आणणारी क ृ त्ये करण्यापाासून परार्वृत्त करण्यासाठी तुम्हांस सदर कायद्याखली ानबध्द करणे अत्यंत आर्वश्यक आहे.” 3.6) It is thus clear that, in the vernacular Marathi version, the Detaining Authority has rightly stated that, the Petitioner was behind bars on the date of passing of the said Detention Order. However in the English version, it is stated that, the Application for bail preferred by the Petitioner has been allowed. Apart from the fact that, the discrepancy in the two versions has caused confusion in the mind of the Petitioner and as a result thereof, the Petitioner was unable to make effective representation to the competent Authority and his right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, is violated. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Case of Vijay Kumar Dharna @ Koka Vs. Union of India & Others, reported in (1990) 1 SCC 606.

3.7) In view of the above, we quash and set aside the impugned Detention Order dated 22nd November 2024, issued by the Respondent No.2.

4) Hence, the following Order: ORDER i) Detention Order dated 22nd November 2024, bearing OW. NO./CRIME PCB/DET/PARVATI/BURUNGALE/950/2024, issued by the Respondent No.2, is quashed and set aside. ii) Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). iii) Petitioner be released from Jail forthwith, if not required in any other case/cases, on production of an authenticated copy of this Order. iv) All the concerned to act on the basis of an authenticated copy of this Order. (RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )