JUDGMENT :

Gajendra Kumar, J.

1. Heard Shri Daya Shankar Mishra, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Chandrakesh Mishra and Shri Abhishek Mishra Advocates, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Shri Patanjali Mishra and Sri Satyendra Tiwari, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-respondents (1) Superintendent, District Jail, Azamgarh, (2) District Magistrate, Azamgarh and (3) State of Uttar Pradesh and Mr. Kameshwar Singh, learned counsel representing Central Government.

2. Pleadings between the contesting parties were exchanged and the matter is ripe for final submissions.

3. After hearing the counsels for the contesting parties on the earlier occasion on 21.04.2023, the Court has allowed the petition, directing the authorities to release the petitioner forthwith, if not wanted in any other case, though detailed judgment would follow. The operative portion of our order reads thus :

“Heard Sri Daya Shankar Mishra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Chandrakesh Mishra and Sri Abhishek Kumar Mishra, learned counsels appearing for the petitioner, Sri Patanjali Mishra and Sri Satyendra Tiwari, learned A.G.A. representing State as well as Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava holding brief of Sri Kameshwar Singh, learned counsel representing Central Government.

The pleadings have been exchanged between the parties and the matter is ripe for final submissions.

We have heard the parties at length and after hearing the parties, we are of the considered opinion that the present petition is liable to be allowed and accordingly, stands allowed. The order impugned dated 25.07.2022 is hereby set-aside. Reasons to be followed later on.

The petitioner-Rangesh Yadav is hereby set at liberty.

The Jail Superintendent, Azamgarh is directed to release the petitioner forthwith, if he is not wanted in some other cases.”

4. By the instant judgement we are giving detailed judgement.

The instant Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner-Rangesh Yadav, who is in custody in District Jail, Azamgarh, through his brother, seeking issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus challenging his detention under an order dated 25.07.2022 passed under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 and the entire consequential proceedings and continued detention as being illegal and unconstitutional and a prayer has been made to issue writ of Habeas Corpus under Article 226 of Constitution of India commanding the respondents to release the petitioner from their alleged illegal custody.

5. The detention order dated 25.07.2021 states that the District Magistrate, Azamgarh has been satisfied that it has become necessary to pass a detention order under Section 3 (2) of the N.S.A. Act, 1980 to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner which would be prejudicial to the maintenance of ‘public order’. The grounds of detention are contained in a separate communication of the same date issued by the District Magistrate, Azamgarh which narrates the incident which led to the passing of the detention order. A first information report dated 21.02.2022, being Case Crime No. 39 of 2022, under section 272, 273, 302, 34 I.P.C. & Section 60 (A) of U.P. Excise Act was lodged at P.S. Ahraula, District Azamgarh by Vijay Sonkar against the petitioner and other co-accused namely Suryabhan, Puneet Kumar Yadav, Rambhoj and Ashok Kumar Yadav with the allegation that his father Jhabbu Sonkar purchased country made liquor ¼nslh 'kjkc½ from the shop of the petitioner Rangesh Yadav on 20.02.2022 and after consuming it, his father has fallen ill and thereafter become blind and his condition started deteriorating. He was admitted in hospital but eventually he died on 21.02.2022, during the course of treatment. When the complainant returned to village with dead body of his father, he came to know that co-villager Ramkaran Bind has also died due to consumption of liquor purchased from the shop of the petitioner-Rangesh Yadav .

6. The s