Kashi Nath Pandey, J.;-

1. A Division Bench of this Court noticed a conflict of opinion in the judgments of the Court delivered in Ram Lal vs. State of U.P., 2000 (41) ACC, 1715 and in Idrish vs. Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi and others, 2002 (44) ACC 1117 and has referred the following questions to be considered by a Larger Bench:-

"(1)Whether the District Magistrate/Detaining Authority acting under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act is required to communicate to the person detained, regarding right of making representation to him in view of Apex Court's decision in Kamlesh Kumar's case (supra)? If so, non communication would infringe fundamental right guaranteed under Article 22 (5) of the Constitution?

(2)If the answer of question no.1 is in the affirmative, whether there is obligation on the District Magistrate (Detaining Authority) to communicate the detenu's right within which the detenu is required to make representation to him i.e. before approval of the detention order by the State Government or before 12 days ? If so non communication of above period will render the detention order invalid?

(3)Whether the District Magistrate/Detai

Click Here to Read the rest of this document