Maheshwari, J. -- 1. Assailing the order dated 28.7.2012, Annexure P-3 passed by respondent No.2 and the order dated 21.9.2012, Annexure P-7 passed by respondent No.1 confirming the order of detention, this petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. It is the contention of the petitioner that on 24.7.2012, a first information report was lodged against him upon which an offence under sections 294, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC was registered at about 22:50 hours. On the next date, i.e., 25.7.2012, five other reports of petty offences were registered in between 11:15 hours and 15 hours in one day. The Superintendent of Police relying upon FIRs submitted a report before the District Magistrate on 27.7.2012. Thereupon, the order of detention was passed on 28.7.2012 directing to keep the petitioner into custody in Central Jail, Rewa. The petitioner has submitted two representations through his mother. The first representation dated 8.8.2012 has been submitted to the detaining authority i.e. District Magistrate and another representation was submitted to State Government on 9.8.2012. The representation submitted to the State Government was decided on 2.1.2013 without its communication, while the representation submitted to the District Magistrate remain undecided, though he is duty bound to decide such representation. In such circumstances, the right to approach the petitioner under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India as well as section 14 of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as Act) has violated by not deciding the same as expeditiously as possible with promptitude by the detaining authority as well as by the appropriate authority. However, this petition has been filed seeking quashment of the said orders.

3. The State Government has filed their reply on 8.2.2013, after availing three opportunities, wherein it is contended that various FIR in two days have been registered against the petitioner on account of his anti-social activities of terrorizing the general public. It is denied that the said FIRs have been registered under the political pressure. The petitioner is an anti-social activist who indulged in gundaism, loot, causes attempt to murder, theft in houses using dangerous weapons. However, the peoples of the locality were in terror by such act, therefore, the officer competent, in exercise of the powers under sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Act has rightly passed the order of detention on 28.7.2012, considering the memorandum of the Superintendent of Police submitted on 27.7.2012. It is submitted that the grounds of detention has been communicated vide Annexure R-2, intimation has been furnished to the Home Department, as per the document Annexure R-3, and immediately he was taken into custody on 28.7.2012. It is also submitted that as per the notification issued on 10th July, 2012, the District Magistrate, Indore is empowered to exercise the powers under sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Act. It is also submitted that the department of Home has sent the approval on 13.8.2012 which was done on 8.8.2012, as per Annexure R-7. It was confirmed vide letter dated 21.9.2012 Annexure R-10, however, clarified that the period of detention of the petitioner shall be of 12 months upto 27.7.2012. It is also submitted that the representation of the petitioner was rejected vide order Annexure R-9 on 2.1.2013. In such circumstances, strict compliance of the provisions of the Act has been done by the State Government while passing the order, therefore, interference in this petition is not called for.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner placed reliance on a judgment of this Court passed in Writ Petition No.9689/2012 Golu alias Anand v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, decided on 13.2.2013. This Court has held that not deciding the representation expeditiously is fatal and on the said ground, the order of detention was quashed. It is submitted that the pet