JUDGMENT

MISRA, J.:— The present appeal by certificate is directed against the Judgment of the High Court of Gauhati dated 23rd of February, 1982 dismissing the petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the order of detention of the appellant.

The District Magistrate, Darrang passed an order of detention on 3rd of January, 1982 against the appellant under S. 3 (3) of the National Security Act, 1980. The order of detention along with the grounds was supplied to the appellant on the same day, that is on 3rd of January, 1982. The appellant was also arrested on the same day. He made a representation on the 9th of January, 1982 through the Superintendent of Special Jail who forwarded the same to the Government on 10th of January, 1982. The State Government received the same on 11th of January, 1982 and it was rejected on 13th of January, 1982.

2. The order of detention was challenged by the appellant on two grounds: (1) that the grounds of detention were vague, and (2) that the facts narrated in the grounds related to law and order situation and not to public order. The High Court repelled both the grounds and dismissed writ petition by its order dated 23rd of February, 1982. The High Court, however, granted a certificate for leave to appeal to this Court.

3. Before dealing with the contentions in this case on behalf of the parties it will be appropriate at this stage to refer to the grounds of detention which were served on the appellant:

"1. Sri Dhananjoy Das, aged about 50 is the President of Purbanchalia Lok Parishad, Tezpur Unit. He is a contractor by profession. Sri Das has been playing a leading part in the current agitation on foreigners issue in collaboration with other active agitators who are leaders of AASU, Karmachari Parishad and Gana Sangram Parishad by organising bundhs, non-co-operation programme inciting people to violate law from time to time. Such activities have disturbed peaceful, tolerant and harmonious life of society.

2. In connection with the programme of Rasta Roko commencing from 0/50 hrs. of 31-12-81 to 1700 hrs. of 1-1-82 Sri Das in collaboration with others like Nabab Shahjamal, Biren Baishya etc. mobilised thousands of people from Parbatia, and other neighbouring areas of the town to give obstructions to motor vehicles on. 31-12-81 and railway traffic on 4-1-82. At the instigation of Sri Das the people came in large numbers violating prohibitory orders. On 1-1-82 the crowd was instigated by him and aforesaid associates to pelt stones, brickbats etc. on police personnel on duty. This led to greater violence in which railway slippers were burnt, and driver of fire brigade was shot at. Ultimately firing was resorted to and three persons died of bullet injury.

3. On 2-1-82, when the whole Tezpur Town was under curfew, Sri Das along with his other associates mobilised people of Parbatia etc. and led a procession of thousands of people through curfewbound areas raising slogans instigating people to violate curfew. This crowd had to be dispersed by use of force.

4. Such activities of Sri Dhananjoy Das are prejudicial to the interest of maintenance of public order. It is essential therefore that in order to prevent him from indulging in such like prejudicial acts, Sri Das is detained under National Security Act."

4. Shri Rangarajan, counsel for the appellant, seriously contended that the first paragraph of the grounds is so vague that the order of detention must be quashed on this ground alone. Shri A. M. Majumdar, Advocate General of Assam, on the other hand has contended that the 1st paragraph of the grounds was only a prelude or introductory and does not deal with the grounds on which the District Magistrate had his subjective satisfaction for passing the order of detention.

5. There is no doubt that if the first paragraph of the grounds constitute the grounds. of detention, it is vague and the order of detention must be quashed on the ground of vagueness with regard to the statement contained ther