Honble ARORA, J. – Smt. Sujata Bhardwaj (the wife) and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Bhardwaj - the brother of the detenu, who are interested in the personal liberty and welfare of detenu Ashwani Kumar Bhardwaj, by these two Habeas Corpus Petitions, have challenged the validity of the order of detention dated 31.8.96 passed by the District Magistrate, Chittorgarh under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act. The District Magistrate, Chittorgarh, on the basis of the material placed before him by the Superintendent of Police, Chittorgarh, was satisfied that the activities of Ashwani Kumar Bhardwaj are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and, therefore, in order to prevent him to engage in such activities in future, he passed the order Annexure 2 dated 31.8.96 under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act (for short, `the Act) for his detention and sent the order of detention to the Jailor, Sub-Jail, Chittorgarh, to be served on the detenu who was confined in the Sub-Jail, Chittorgarh. The copy of the order was served on the detenu in the Sub-Jail, Chittorgarh on the same day. This order was, also, served on Shri Dalip Sarker the brother of petitioner Smt. Sujata Bhardwaj. Copies of this order were, also, sent to the State Government and the Central Government. A copy of this order was, also, sent to Smt. Sujata the wife of the detenu which was served upon her, also. The detenu was, also, informed that if he wants to make any representation to the State Government then he can make such representation.

(2). On 14.9.96 the detenu submitted six copies of his representations to the Jailor, Sub-Jail, Chittorgarh, who forwarded these representations to the District Magistrate, Chittorgarh, i.e., the Detaining Authority. The Detaining Authority, on the same day, sent these representations to the State Government, wherefrom the representations were sent to the Central Government and the Advisory Board.

(3). The order passed by the Detaining Authority was approved by the State Government on 9.9.96. The representation made by the detenu was considered by the State Government and was rejected on 26.9.96. An information regarding rejection of the representation of the detenu, was conveyed to him by the Detaining Authority on 27.9.96. The detenu appeared before the Advisory Board on 30.9.96. He was heard by the Advisory Board. The Advisory Board, after considering the representation made by the detenu, approved the detention of Ashwani Kumar Bhardwaj. The State Government, after considering the report of the Advisory Board, the representation made by the detenu and taking into consideration the relevant record of the case, approved the detention of Ashwani Kumar Bhardwaj for a period of one year, i.e., with effect from 31.8.96 to 30.8.97.

(4). The petitioners have challenged the order dated 31.8.96 passed by the Detaining Authority under Section 3(2) of the Act on the grounds that (i) the grounds of detention and the detention order have not been made contemporaneously or simultaneously; (ii) the detenu has not been informed of his right to make a representation to the Advisory Board and to the Central Government ; (iii) the dete- nu was already in the jail and there was no compelling necessity to pass the detention order; (iv) there is complete non-application of mind by the Detaining Authority at the time of passing the detention order; (v) affidavits in reply to the Habeas Corpus Petitions have not been filed by the proper person, i.e., by the Detaining Authority; (vi) there is a complete violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India as the documents considered by the Detaining Authority at the time of passing the detention order, were not communicated to the detenu; (vii) irrele- vant material like the cases against the detenu under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act were considered by the Detaining Authority while passing the detention order; (viii) all the cases forming the grounds of detention relate to the la

Click Here to Read the rest of this document