Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. This is a petition filed by the detenu who is detained in terms of the provisions Section 3(1) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). 2) On 17/3/2007, the detenu was taken into detention and the copy of the grounds of detention was served on him. One of the grounds agitated in the grounds was that two statements were recorded by the Police in camera from anonymous persons whose names were not disclosed to the detenu who spoke about the activities of the detenu which would amount to danger to the public at large. 3. There is a judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2000 ALL MR (Cri) 1503, Phulwari Jagdambaprasad Pathak vs. R.H. Mendonca & Ors. in which the Supreme Court, while commenting on the statements made in camera and their use as a material of detaining a person observed that the statements made in camera and relied upon by the detaining authority should be with regard to the facts. In this case, we have seen that after the statements were recorded by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, he himself was doubtful whether the facts disclosed by the witnesses before him were correct or not. In his report, after recording the statements, he has verified the statement that witnesses were scared and there was danger to their life and property was true, though without verifying whether the incident disclosed by the witnesses was true or not. 4. For these reasons, we feel the order of detention cannot be sustained. The Writ Petition is allowed. The order of the detention is quashed. Petitioner be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Petition allowed.