In these four (4) writ petitions, namely Civil Rule Nos. 2314, 2236 and 2415 01 1990, and Civil Rule No. 11 of 1991, the Cons­titutional validity of the provisions of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1938 (Act 28 of 1958) and the Assam Disturbed Areas Act, 1955 (Act 19 of 1955) arc challenged. Toe validity of the two Acts were challenged earlier in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. But the pro­ceedings were transferred from the Gauhati High Court to the Delhi High Court by the Supreme Court. A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has, in indrajit Barua vs. State of Assam reported in AIR 1983 Delhi 513, held that the two Acts are valid except those relating to Ass dm Rifles under the Assam Act. While dealing with the above referred Civil Rules, a Division Bench of this Court has referred the following two (2) questions for­mulated in the order of reference to a larger Bench. Hence they are before us.

2. the questions are ;

*1. Whether the army authorities under the provisions of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) . ct, 1958. (Act No 28 of 1958) can arrest a citizen or an individual, male or female, without any invitation on the part of the poli