Back
1999 (2) Crimes 315
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (D.B.)
D.P. Mohapatra. C.J. & R.R.K. Trivedi. J.
Ashok Kumar Gupta - Petitioner
versus
District Magistrate, Jalaun & Ors. - Respondents
Habeas Corpus Writ Petition Nos. 10594 & 10596 of 1998
Decided on 25-9-1998
Counsel for the parties
For the Petitioner: Mr. Tej Pal. Advocate.
For the Respondents: A.G.J. & Mr. S.C. Mishra, Addl. Standing Counsel.
IMPORTANT POINT
Unexplained delay of 95 days in deciding representation of detenu renders detention illegal.
Headnote:(i) National Security Act. 1980 - Section 3(2) - Preventive detention order - "Law and order" and "public order" whether an act relates to law and order or to "public order" depends upon the effect of the act on life of community - Petitioners and their companions committed murder of a student who was a candidate in the elections of Students Union in broad day light inside the college campus defying security arrangements - Act of petitioners had potentiality to disturb and dislocate even tempo of life of community Impugned order suffered no illegality on that ground. (Para 14)
(ii) Preventive Detention Order - Detention order was passed on 29-12-1997 - Petitioner earlier arrested in murder case had moved bail application on 11-12-1997 - Impugned order could not be assailed on basis of subsequent developments made on basis of application of petitioner. (Para 15)
(iii) Preventive Detention - Delay in disposal of representation Re-presentation filed by petitioner received by Central Govt. on 2-2-1998 came to be rejected on 24-4-1998 - Wholly insufficient explanation for delay - Delay rendered detention order illegal. (Para 16)
Result: Petitions allowed.
JUDGMENT
R.R.K. Trivedi. J. - In both the aforesaid petitions, questions of facts and law involved are similar and both the petitions may be decided by a common order against which learned Counsel for the parties have no objection. Petition No. 10594 of 19915 shall be the leading case.
2. Both the petitioners aggrieved by their preventive detention have questioned the legality of the orders dated 29-12-I997 passed by respondent No.1, under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Copies of the orders have been filed as Annexure A-1 in both the petitions. Along with the order or detention petitioners were also served the grounds on which basis respondent No.1 formed his subjective satisfaction for passing the impugned orders Except for a slight variation in respect of detenu Shanker Singh the grounds stated are also similar. In the grounds it has been stated that in view of the election of the Students' Union of Mahatma Gandhi Degree College. Orai. District Jalaun. scheduled to be held on 25-11-1997. 1-1/2 Section of P.A.C. and civil police was deployed in the college premises to maintain law and order. On 25-11-1997, at about 11.30 a.m., both the petition, along with their of her companions indiscriminately fired at Satendra Tripathi a student of M.A. Part 1 who was a candidate for the post of President of the Union and killed him at a crowded public place in presence of the P.A.C. and police force. Petitioners also threatened the persons present there from becoming wit ness of the crime otherwise they shall also be killed. The P.A.C. and police force present there chased the petitioners and their companions but they resorted to firing and escaped. The P.A.C. and police force could not fire at them for the sake of safety of the crowd and persons of the public present there,
3. That on account of the daring act of the petitioners an atmosphere of commotion and fear prevailed there. People ran helter-skelter. On account of the fear shops were dosed, people went inside their houses and the public order was completely disturbed. In order to remove the fear from the minds of the residents of the locality and students of the college, additional police force consisting of three platoon of P.A.C. and other civil police force was summoned from the rural area and deployed in the college campus. A report or this occurrence was lodged on the same day at about 12.20 p.m. by Mahendra Tripathi brother of the deceased. Case was registered at Police Station Kotwali, Omit as Case Crime No. 1057 of 1997, under Sections 147/148/149/302, I.P.C.
4. In view of the daring and heinous murder committed by the petitioners and their companions, the election of the Students Union of the college had to be postponed for a period of one month.
5. Eye-witnesses of the aforesaid occurrence Ram Singh. Manoj Budhauliya and Riyasat Khan were examined under Section 161. Cr. P.C. by the Investigating Officer. The aforesaid witnesses in their statements have stated that the public order in t he locality was badly disturbed and people ran helter-skelter. Complainant Mahendra Tripathi in his statement under Section 161. Cr. P. C. named both t he petitioners and also named Saryu Prasad and Bablu Srivastava. He further stated that on account of death of his brother in the above occurrence he was grieved and nervous hence he could not name accused Nausher, Saryu Prasad and Bablu Srivastava in the FIR. On his confidence being restored he stated the facts before the Investigating Officer. From the post-mortem report also it appears that Satendra Tripathi died on account of injuries caused by the-arm. The Investigating Officer visited t he spot immediately after the occurrence and found that the shops and houses were closed and there was complete lull in the locality. Newspaper 'Dainik Jagran' and local newspaper 'Soch Samajh' published on 26-II-I997 reported about the occurrence of the brutal murder in detail.
In the grounds it
