Point of Law : It is, thus, settled that the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority has to be based on objective material and any non-existent or misconceived or irrelevant consideration, if forms basis of detention order, the order of detention would be invalid.

JUDGMENT :

1. Since the issues raised in all the connected Habeas Corpus petitions are one and the same and hence they have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. Heard Sri Nazrul Islam Jafri learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sharique Ahmed, Sri Ali Zamal Khan and Sri Sadaful Islam Jafri learned Advocates for the petitioners, Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and Sri Shashi Dhar Sahai learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India.

2. The petitioners herein have been detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (herein after referred to as “NSA”).

The prayer in the writ petitions is to quash the order dated 3.9.2020 passed by the District Magistrate, Mau invoking powers under Section 3(2) of the NSA as also the order dated 23.10.2020 passed by the State Government extending the period of detention for three months under Section 12(1) of the NSA.

Certain dates of the proceedings undertaken against the petitioners are relevant to be noted at the outset.

3. In an incident occurred on 16.12.2019 at about 6:30 PM, a first information report was lodged against 85 named persons and 600 unnamed on 17.12.2019, by the informant namely S.H.O. Nihar Nandan Kumar at the Police Station Dakshin Tola, District Mau. The report of the sponsoring authority namely S.H.O., Police Station Dakshin Tola, District Mau addressed to the Superintendent of Police, District Mau was submitted on 27/28.8.2020. Pursuant thereto, by the letter dated 31.8.2020, the Superintendent of Police, District Mau had requested the District Magistrate, Mau to detain the petitioners by invoking powers under Section 3(2) of the NSA. On 3.9.2020, separate orders for detention of the petitioners were passed by the District Magistrate, Mau recording his satisfaction that the detention of the petitioner(s) was necessary in order to prevent them from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order. At the time of the passing of the detention order, the petitioners herein were already in custody in the District Jail, Mau.

4. The grounds of detention were communicated to the petitioners on 3.9.2020 itself. On 14.9.2020, the petitioners made representations (separately) for presentation of the same before the State Advisory Board. The said representations were forwarded by the Superintendent, District Jail, Mau to the office of the District Magistrate, Mau on 15.9.2020. The District Magistrate, Mau had sent the representations of the petitioners to the State Government on 24.9.2020. On 11.9.2020, the detention orders passed by the District Magistrate, Mau were approved by the State Government exercising powers under Section 3(4) of the National Security Act.

Soon after the receipt of the representations, the District Magistrate had rejected them on the ground that the detention orders were already approved by the State Government before the representations were received in his office. On 6.10.2020, the representations of the petitioners were rejected by the State Government and the orders were communicated on 7.10.2020. On 13.10.2020, the petitioners were produced before the State Advisory Board through Video Conferencing. The State Advisory Board had submitted its report on 19.10.2020 in accordance with Section 11(1) of the NSA through the Registrar, State Advisory Board. On the basis of the said report, the State Government had confirmed the order of detention under Section 12(1) of the National Security Act on 23.10.2020 and extended the period of detention for further three months.

In the meantime, the Union of India had also rejected the representations of the petitioners and information was given to the petitioners by wireless messages. On 24.11.2020 and 24.2.2021 and lastly on 31.5.2021, the detention orders were extended for three months (each time), making total period of detention being 12 months from 3.9.2020, the date of detention.

5. In the counter affidavit filed on behal