Judgment

KHANNA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by Chotta Hembram for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.

( 2 ) AN order for the detention of the petitioner was made under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (Act 26 of 1971) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), by the District Magistrate of Burdwan on 3/07/1972. The petitioner by means of this petition challenged the validity of the aforesaid order for his detention. From the reply filed on behalf of the State of West Bengal it would appear that the petitioner was released on 28/04/1973 and a fresh order for the detention of the petitioner was made on 26/04/1973 by the District Magistrate of Burdwan during the pendency of the present petition.

( 3 ) THE present petition, it may be mentioned, was sent from jail by the petitioner on 22/02/1973. The petitioner is now being detained in pursuance of the fresh order of detention dated 26/04/1973. It is the validity of this later order of detention which is now being assailed before us on behalf of the petitioner.

( 4 ) AFTER hearing Mr. Datta, who has argued the case amicus curiae, and Mr. Kshtriya on behalf of the State of West Bengal, we are of the view that the validity of the detention order dated 26/04/1973 cannot be sustained. The grounds of detention on the basis of which the petitioner was ordered to be detained by the District Magistate on 3/07/1972 were as under :" (1) On 8-11-71 at about 12. 30 hours, you along with your associates viz. Kartick Pal and others belonging to CPI (ML), being armed with lethal weapons like daggers, tangi etc. attacked Karunamoy Pal (Congress-R) of Daoradanga, P. 8, Bhatra, Distt. Burdwan and stabbed him to death near his house with a view to promoting the cause of the party to which you belong as he refused to join hands with you. Your act created a general sense of insecurity and deterred the residents of the locality from following their normal avocation of life for a considerable period after the incident. (2) On 14-1-72 at about 17. 35 hours, you along with your associates viz. Kartick Pal and others belonging to CPI (ML) being armed with gun attacked Ram Krishan Sarkar by barricading the roads with pillars and shot at him from an unlicensed gun with a view to annihilating them to promote the cause of the party to which you belong. As a result, Constable 721 Rajaram Jadav received gun shot injuries. Your act created a general sense of insecurity and deterred the residents of the locality from following their normal avocations of life for a considerable period after the incident. "

( 5 ) PRECISELY, these are the very grounds on account of which the fresh order of detention for the petitioner has been made on 26/04/1973.

( 6 ) ACCORDING to sub-sec. (2) of Section 14 of the Act "the revocation or expiry of a detention order shall not bar the making of a fresh detention order under Section 3 against the same person in any case where fresh facts have arisen after the date of revocation or expiry on which the Central Government or a State Government or an officer, as the case may be is satisfied that such an order should be made". It would, therefore, follow that if an order for the detention of a person had been made under the Act and that order was either subsequently revoked or the period for which the detention order was made has expired, the said order would not stand in the way of the making of a fresh order of detention under Section 3 of the Act against the same person provided fresh facts arise after the date of the said revocation or expiry. If no fresh facts come into being after the date of revocation or expiry as may warrant the making of an order of detention, the requisite condition precedent to the making of the subsequent order would be non-existent an it would not be permissible to make a subsequent order of detention under Section 3 of the Act. The order for the detention of the petitioner