Back
1991 Supreme(Mad) 834
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MARUTHAMUTHU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T S ARUNACHALAM
Manoj and Etc - Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu and Others - Respondents
Writ Petn. Nos. 7942 to 7946 of 1991
Decided On : 08 November 1991
Acts that have the potential to unleash a terror wave in a locality and clandestine activities that are prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community can constitute disturbance of public order and justify detention under the National Security Act.
Headnote:
NATIONAL SECURITY ACT - SECTION 3(2) - PUBLIC ORDER - MAINTENANCE OF SUPPLIES AND SERVICES ESSENTIAL TO THE COMMUNITY - DISTURBANCE OF PUBLIC ORDER - LAW AND ORDER - FOREIGNERS - DETENTION - VALIDITY. 1. The non-recovery of arms, can be of no consequence, to strike down the impugned orders of detention. The orders of detention, contain averments, that admittedly, the militants who had escaped had gone away with A.K. 47 Rifles. The argument, that the detenus wanted to return to Srilanka and hence they were near the sea-shore, with little quantity of petrol or diesel, to facilitate their return, does not appear to have any foundation or basis. 2. The confessions of the detenus, which are relevant material for passing the impugned orders of detention, clearly contain contra details, showing the clandestine activity of the detenus, who were desirous of taking away petrol, diesel, acid etc., for the use of the Militant Organisation, to fight against the Cyelonese Army and for preparation of bombs, towards that end. 2100 litres of petrol and 50 litres of diesel can by no stretch of imagination be stated to be a negligible quantity, as sought to be contended by Mr. D. Veerasekaran. 3. Non-registration of any crime earlier against the detenus, can have no significance whatever, to affect, the valid passing of the impugned orders of detention. The claim of the detenus' counsel as thought they had all come to India as refugees, stands contradicted, by the contents of the confession statements, made by them. They have admitted, that their arrival into India clandestinely, was about 15 days prior to their apprehension, the avowed object being to take away the articles seized from them, to Srilanka, which had been collected by the members of their Organisation at Salem. The confession statements show that diesel, petrol and acid were intended for illegal export to Srilanka. There appears to be no substance in the argument, that the purchase of diesel or petrol from agencies situated in India, will not affect the community at large. If the manner in which diesel and petrol are obtained for use in this country is taken note of, any attempt to clandestinely take it from India, would certainly prejudicially affect the citizens of this country. 4. The Explanation to Sec. 3(2) of the National Security Act reads as follows :- "For the purposes of this sub-section" acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community "does not include acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodies essential to the commodity as defined in the Explanation to sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980, and accordingly, no order of detention shall be made under this Act on any ground on which an order of detention may be made under the Act." 5. To appreciate the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it will be necessary to extract the explanation appended to Sec. 3(1) of the Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980. It reads as hereunder :- "Explanation :- For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression" acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community "means - (a) committing or instigating any person to commit any offence punishable under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955), or under any other law for the time being in force relating to the control of the production, supply of distribution of, or trade and commerce in, any commodity essential to the community; or (b) dealing in any commodity - (i) which is an essential commodity as defined in the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955), or (ii) with respect to which provisions have been made in any such other law, as is referred to in clause (a) with a view to making gain in any manner which may directly or indirectly defeat or tend to defeat the provisions of that Act or other law aforesaid." 6. The contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, that in view of Explanation to Sec. 3(2) of the Act, the ground of detention was not germane, with the object of prevention of prejudicial activity to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community, has to be stated only to be repelled. Needless to add that clandestinely obtaining petrol and diesel for transportation to Srilanka, would certainly attract that limb of Sec. 3(2) of the Act, relating to acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community. The two explanations extracted above clearly show, that they operate in two different fields and one cannot be confused with the other. The Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 was intended for detention in certain cases, for the purpose of prevention of black-marketing and maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community and for matters connected therewith. The said object cannot be confused with the object sought to be achieved by the National Security Act, 1980. We also hold, that the nature of acts committed and the intention with which they were committed, were sufficient to satisfy a reasonable mind, that the detenus if let large, would indulge in similar activities and thus prejudicially affect the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community. 7. The stage has reached to consider, whether the grounds disclose a mere law and order problem or relates to disturbance of public order. The facts narrated earlier clearly show, that some of the travellers in the van and in the jeep, all of them belonging to the LTTE Organisation, threatened the Police party wielding A.K. 47 Rifles. They further threatened to fire at the police party, when they were sought to be apprehended, from their hide-outs. A crime has been registered under Sec. 307 of the Penal Code as well as under the provisions of the Arms Act and Explosives Substances Act. The check-post police party were keeping watch at Arasangarai village with the avowed object of checking the movements of LTTE militants. Hence they were the custodians of law and order as well as public order. The material appended to the order of detention and the grounds show, that the residents in the neighbouring locality, crowded at the scene. 8. We are satisfied that the activities of the detenus cover a wider field and fall within the contours of the concept of public order. 9. We are satisfied that the orders of detention have been validly made. All the grounds of attack having been negatived, these writ petitions deserve dismissal. All the writ petitions are accordingly dismissed.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, alleged to be members of the LTTE, were detained under the National Security Act for their involvement in illegal activities, including the transportation of petrol, diesel, and acid from India to Sri Lanka. The petitioners challenged the detention orders, arguing that the acts attributed to them did not amount to disturbance of public order and that the detention was not justified under the National Security Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioners' actions, including threatening the police with guns, removing the check-post bar, and attempting to escape, had the potential to unleash a terror wave in the locality and thus disturbed public order. The court also held that the petitioners' clandestine activities, such as obtaining petrol and diesel for illegal export to Sri Lanka, were prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners' actions constituted disturbance of public order or merely a law and order problem? 2. Whether the petitioners' detention under the National Security Act was justified?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the petitioners' actions, including threatening the police with guns, removing the check-post bar, and attempting to escape, had the potential to unleash a terror wave in the locality and thus disturbed public order. The court relied on the fact that the petitioners were members of the LTTE, a militant organization, and that their actions were intended to further the organization's goals. 2. The court held that the petitioners' clandestine activities, such as obtaining petrol and diesel for illegal export to Sri Lanka, were prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community. The court noted that the petitioners' actions had the potential to affect the availability of these essential commodities to the general public.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitioners' writ petitions, upholding the validity of the detention orders.
ARUNACHALAM, J.
All these Writ Petitions are disposed of together by a common order, since the detenus concerned in these writs, are stated to be involved in the same transaction. The contentions raised are also identical. All these writ petitions have been filed for the issue of a habeas, for the production of the respective detenus, before this Court, for their being set at liberty, after quashing the impugned orders of detention dated 15-2-1991 passed by the second respondent, viz., the District Magistrate and Collector, Pudukkottai. In all these writ petitions the affidavits have been sworn to by one T. S. Mani, who claims himself to be the fiends of the detenus. He has further averred, that he has filed these writ petitions on the instructions and the facts furnished by the respective detenus. The said Mani has also claimed that he is the State Organising Secretary of Dravidar Kashagam, which supports the organisation called "The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam"(in short, LTTE) of Sri Lanka. Further details in the activities of the LITE, need not have to be stated, for the disposal of these Writ Petitions.
2. Facts which led to be passing of the impugned orders of detention, will have to be narrated. All these orders of detention have been made in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-sec. (2) of S. 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (Central Act 65 of 1980), with a view to preventing the detenus from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community. A police check-post had been created at Arasangarai village in Pudukkottai District on the highway between Thondi and Sethubavachatram, for the purpose of checking, the movements of all vehicles and other unlawful activities and more particularly vehicles of Srilankan Tamil Militants, for detecting the illegal transporting of commodities like diesel, petrol and weapons from India to Srilanka for their own use in Srilanka. Special Armed Police parties were posted at the check-post to control the unlawful entry of Srilanka Tamil Militants in sea-shore areas of Indian territory and also to control the movements of Srilankan Tamil Militants, who had entered into India without any valid passport, through unconventional channel and were involved in unauthorisedly transporting huge quantity of petrol, diesel, motor oil and acid to Srilanka, for their own use.
3. While the police party was engaged in checking the vehicles at Arasangarai village checkpost, at or about 4 a.m. on 26-1-1991, the Inspector of Police, Mimisal stopped the jeep bearing Registration No. T.N.-07-A-2088 and Mitshubishi Van, bearing Registration No. TSJ 5324. The Inspector of Police found eight persons, including two ladies, having occupied the jeep. This group included the driver as well. In the van, inclusive of the driver, five persons were the travellers. As soon as the vehicles were stopped, four persons got down from the jeep, wielding A.K. 47 Rifles. They informed the police officials, that they were Tamil Militants and their vehicles should not be checked. They further threatened to open fire, if their request was not heeded to. Thereafter, two of the militants, removed the cross-bar of the check-post. Meanwhile, the driver of the jeep started the vehicle, crossed the check-post and halted. When the militants in the van attempted to cross the check-post, the police replaced the cross-bar in its original position. The driver of the van, after attempting to dash the vehicle against the police, tried to escape towards Thondi. The Inspector of Police, who was unable to arrest the movement of the van, ordered the Special Armed Police Constable LNK 905 and P.C. 955 to open fire, at the tyres of the van. Accordingly both the constables opened fire and as a result the van was stopped. The militants got down from the van and opened fire at the police party. Meanwhile, the four militants, who were standin
