Preventive detention under Article 22 can limit rights under Article 21; the right to speedy trial is contingent upon the initiation of investigation.

JUDGMENT

Rajbir Sehrawat, J.

Freedom; and absolute freedom; has been cherished desire of every human being since the human beings sensed the instinct of 'possession'. However, absolute freedom for one can have huge adverse consequences qua the freedom of another person. Therefore, as a principle of civilized social organization, a new idea was born; which is called liberty. Liberty is the freedom as regulated by law laid down by the sovereign. Therefore, in all legal systems prevalent under various types of sovereigns, the liberty of individual has been ensured to some extent and has been curbed qua certain aspects and under certain circumstances. Article 21 of the Constitution of Bharat contains one of the most important fundamental rights guaranteed to all in India. This Article guarantees right to life and liberty for all. Therefore, this Article can be aptly called as the brightest shining star in the constitutional constellation of Bharat. However, all brightest shining stars are cursed to undergo an eclipse as well. Article 21 of the Constitution is no exception to this. The Article 22 of the Constitution puts curbs on the liberty of citizen to some extent in certain situations; and to a greater extent for certain reasons. Article 22 of the Constitution though framed as protection, however, it also deals with the permissible curbs; and to some extent permits limiting the liberty of an individual to a great extent; for some time period. The present case represents the classic friction between Article 21 of the Constitution and the Article 22, as contained in the Constitution of Bharat.

2. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Code'), for issuance of directions to respondents No.3 and 4 to effect arrest and to join the petitioner in the investigation in case FIR No.39 dated 24.02.2023, registered under Sections 307, 353, 186, 332, 333, 506, 120B, 427, 148 and 149 IPC, at Police Station Ajnala, District Amrtisar Rural, and to conclude the investigation in the said FIR at the earliest, so as not to infringe his right to speedy trial; which includes speedy investigation, as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of Bharat as he alongwith nine others has been detained under the National Security Act, 1980, at Dibrugarh Central Jail, Assam, in March, 2023 and no arrest has been effected in the criminal case registered against them; for the last six months, with certain other prayers made in the present petition.

3. The facts of this case, in brief, are that a large number of persons carried out a protests in the State of Punjab under leadership of one Amritpal Singh, who claimed to be head of an organization, named, 'Waris Punjab De'. In the process, on 23.02.2023, they, allegedly, ransacked Police Station Ajnala, attacked police persons and had destroyed the record of the police station, besides creating an adverse situation for the public order. Accordingly, FIR No.39 dated 24.02.2023, under Sections 307, 353, 186, 332, 333, 506, 120B, 427, 148 and 149 IPC, at Police Station Ajnala, District Amrtisar Rural, was registered against 19 persons, who are named in the FIR, and against 200-250 unknown persons. The name of the petitioner does not find mentioned in the said FIR. However, challan has already been filed in the said FIR against some of the accused. Name of the petitioner is mentioned in column No.2 in the final report filed against the other accused. Beside this, the competent authority had passed the order dated 18.03.2023 regarding the preventive detention of 09 persons under the National Security Act. The petitioner is one of these 09 persons. The validity of the said detention order passed against the petitioner has been approved by the Advisory Board and thereafter, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the same by filing a writ petition before this Court, which is pending for adjudication separately. All these 09 detained persons have