O. P. SRIVASTAVA, J.

Since the facts of the above two writ petitions are identical and the common arguments have been advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, both these petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Through the above writ petitions the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 18-1-2005 passed by District Magistrate under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (in short act) with a writ in the nature of habeas corpus for their release.

3. The facts leading to the passing of impugned order dated 18-1-2005, in brief, are that the petitioners were found involved in cow slaughter and they were, therefore, challanged and are being prosecuted separately. However, the said act of the petitioners disturbed the public order and the police had to take so many steps as mentioned in the grounds to control the situation. Therefore, since the District Magistrate was satisfied that they were likely to get themselves released and indulged in prejudicial activities impugned order has slapped against the petitioners.

4. The petitioners made statutory representation to the various authorities but they w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document