An order passed under Section 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be self-contained and speaking order, and should show the full application of mind of the State Government to the facts and circumstances of the particular case.

1. The petitioners are being confined in the Central jail at Ambala under the order 29-6-1989 Annexure P-1 passed u/S. 268 of the Cri. P.C. They are also facing trial for some other offences in different Courts at Patiala and are not being produced in those Courts in view of the above referred order of the State Government. The State of Haryana thought of passing the above referred order after the petitioners were arrested in a case registered against them vide FIR No.336 dated 22-9-1988 at Police Station Assandh for offences u/Ss.3/4/5/6 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 and Ss. 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.

2. Through this writ petition, the petitioners have sought the quashment of the above referred order passed by the State of Haryana u/S. 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

3. The learned Sessions Judge, Patiala, on the move of Shri S.S.Kanwal, the learned Additional Sessinons Judge, Patiala, had also made a reference to this Court as Bhajan Vir Singh, one of the petitioners in the present writ petition, is not being produced in that Court in a case registred against him vide FIR No. 145 dated 2-9-1987 at Police Station Sadar Patiala for offences u/Ss. 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.

4. Both the matters shall be disposed of by this judgment.

5. The main attack of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the impugned order Annexure P-1 was not passed by the Haryana State after full application of mind to the facts and circumstances of the case, although subs.(2) of S.268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure envisages full application of mind in this regard.

6. Mr. Raghbir Chaudhary appearing on behalf of the State of Haryana on the other hand maintains that the particulars of the cases and the offences for which cases have been registered against the petitioners are given in the schedule appended under the order and thus it cannot be said that the State had not applied its mind to the facts and circumstances of the case while passing the impugned order.

7. Mr. S. K. Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, appearing on behalf of the State of Punjab on the other hand states that some cases are pending against the petitioners in Patiala Courts and that the trial is being prolonged in those cases as the petitioners cannot be taken out of Central Jail, Ambala, in pursuance of the impugned order. The impugned order Annexure P-1 reads as under :

"Whereas the persons mentioned in the schedule given below have been confined in the Jails shown against their names as undertrials in connection with various offences indicated against their names : And whereas having regard to the nature of the offences for which they have been ordered to be confined and from the material placed before him the Governor of Haryana is satisfied that there is likelihood of the disturbance of public order of the persons mentioned in the said schedule are allowed to be removed from the Jail (prison). Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by S. 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Governor of Haryana hereby directs that till further orders, the persons mentioned in the said schedule shall not be removed from the Jails in which they are confined."

Relevant portion of the schedule pertaining to the present petitioners reads as under :

"Name and parentage FIR No. and Date Police Station Offence Name of the Jail in which confined (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 4. Bajanbir Singh alias Lali Sukhdev Singh Jat r/o H. No. 65, Indira Puri Colony, Patila 336/22-9-88 Assandh Distt. Karnal U/Ss 3/4/5 TDAP Act Ambala Jail. 5. Surinderpal Singh Chadda s/o Kirpal Singh Khatri Sikh r/o Gali No.6, Lahori Gate, Patiala. -do- -do- -do- -do- 6. Jatinder Singh s/o Kundan Singh r/o Lal Kothi, Sarhandi Gate, Patiala. 336/22-9-88 Assandh Distt. Karnal U/ss 3/4/5 TDAP Act Ambala Jail."

A perusal of the above-referred order leaves no doubt that although the number of the FIR and the particular se