SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(SC) 419

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, CJI., P.N. BHAGWATI, AMARENDRA NATH SEN, D.P. MADON AND M.P. THAKKAR, JJ.
State of Punjab and others, Appellants

Versus

Jagdev Singh Talwandi, Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No. 692 of 1983

Decided on 16-12-1983.
Advocates appeared
Mr. K. Parasaran, Attorney General of India, Mr. Bhagwat Singh, Advocate General (Punjab), Mr. Gurmukh Singh, Addl. Advocate General of Punjab, Mr. D. S. Brar, Asstt. Advocate General, Mr. G. S. Mann, Dy. Advocate General, Mr. R. D. Aggarwal, Govt, Advocate and Miss. A. Subhashini and S. K. Bagga, Advocates with them, for Appellants; Mr. Hardev Singh, Sr. Advocate, Mr. G. S. Grewal, Sr. Advocate and M/s N. S. Das Behl, R. S. Sodhi and J.S. Sandhwalia, Advocates with them, for respondents.
* Criminal Writ Petn. No. 516 of 1983, d/- 29-11-1983 (Punj. & Har.).

Advocates:
A.Subhashini, BHAGVANT SINGH, D.S.BRAR, G.S.GREVAL, G.S.Mann, GURMIT SINGH, HARDEV SINGH, J.S.SANDHAVALIA, K.PARASARAN ATTORNEY, N.S.DAS BEHL, R.D.AGRAWAL, R.S.SODHI, S.K.Bagga

IMPORTANT POINT
The detenu is not entitled to be informed of the source of information received against him or the evidence which may have been collected against him by the detaining authority.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Headnote:(i) National Security Act, 1980-Sections 3(3) read with Section 3(2) - Constitution of India, 1950-Article 22(5) - Respondent detained under Sections 3/3 read with Section 3(2) of National Security Act - Two detailed grounds of detention were served-Extract of C.I.D. report furnished to the detenu-Ground No.1 was so detailed that such extract was not necessary - Whether sufficient particulars of the first ground of detention were furnished to the respondent so as to enable him to exercise effectively his constitutional right of making a representation against the order of detention? (Yes) Whether order of detention suffers from a total non-application of mind? (No) Whether the evidence gathered by the detaining authority and source of information against the detenu must also be furnished to him? (No) Result - High Court set aside-States appeal allowed Case remanded to High Court. (Paras 17, 19, 24, 30)

       (ii) National Security Act, 1980 - Section 3(3) read with Section 3(2) -Detention order passed by District Magistrate - Order challenged - District Magistrate got filing affidavit - Deputy Secretary in Home Deptt. filing affidavit - No mala fide attributed against the Distt. Magistrate - Whether in this case, failure of detaining authority in filing his own affidavit vitiates the order of detention? (No, though it is desirable that affidavit should. be filed by detaining authority himself. (Paras 25 to 29)

       (iii) Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 136 - Practice of High Court to pronounce a final order without a reasoned judgment - Whether proper? (No) (Paras 31 and 32).

       FINAL ORDER WITHOUT REASONED JUDGMENT - FINAL ORDER AND REASONED JUDGMENT FOR IT

       -it is desirable that the final order which the High Court intends to pass should not be announced until a reasoned judgment is ready to be pronounced. It was observed by the Supreme Court in the State of Punjab v. Jagdev Singh Talwandi, AIR 1984 SC 444 that, that places the Supreme Court in a predicament because, without the benefit of the reasoning of the High Court, it is difficult for the Supreme Court to allow the leave order to be implemented.

       -held, until a reasoned judgment is ready for pronouncement it is desirable that the order intended to be passed by the High Court should not be announced.

JUDGMENT

CHANDRACHUD, CJI. — This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment dated Nov. 29, 1983 of a learned single Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Writ Petition No. 516 of 1983. That writ petition was filed by the respondent. Shri Jagdev Singh Talwandi, to challenge an order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Ludhiana, on Oct. 3, 1983 whereby the respondent was detained under Sec. 3 (3) read with S. 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980.

2. The respondent was arrested in pursuance of the order of detention on the night between Oct. 3 and 4, 1983. He was first lodged in the Central Jail, Patiala and from there he was taken to Ambala, Baroda and Fethegarh (U. P). He filed a Writ Petition (No. 463 of 1983) in the High Court to challenge his transfer and detention in a place far away from Ambala. He withdrew that petition on an assurance by the Government that he will be sent back to Ambala, which the Government did on October 28.

3. The grounds of detention were served on the respondent on Oct. 6, 1983. Those grounds show that the petitioner was detained on the basis of two speeches allegedly made by him : one on July 8, 1983 at Nihang Chhowani, Baba Bakala., District Amritsar and the other on Sept. 20, 1983 at Gurdwara Manji Sahib, Amritsar. The grounds furnished to the petitioner read thus:

"(1) That you in a Shaheedi Conference which was held from 11 a. m. to 4.45 p. m. on 2-7-1983 at a place known as Nihang Chhowani at Baba Bakala, District Amritsar, delivered a provocative speech to a Sikh gathering comprising about 2000/2200 persons wherein you made a pointed reference to the incident dated 2-7-1983 of encounters between Nihangs and police at Baba Bakala and Tarn Taran and stressed that in order to take revenge Sikhs would kill their (Police) four persons in lieu of the two Nihangs who had been killed in the said encounters.

(2) That while addressing a conference convened by the AISSF (All India Sikh Students Federation) on 20-9-1983 at Gurdwara Manji Sahib at Amritsar and attended by about 7000/8000 Sikh students, you made a provocative speech wherein you said that all efforts made for the success of the Akali Morcha having failed, it was still time to establish in Punjab a Government parallel to the Central Government and that you are in a position to form such a Government. You further exhorted that the establishment of Khalsa Raj was the only solution to the problems. You also made a suggestion that the Government will not accept any demand unless it was compelled by force to do so. This statement was also published in the various newspapers. A case F. I. R. No. 295 dated 27-9-1983 under Section 124-A, I. P. C.. and S. 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, was registered at Police Station E Division, Amritsar, which is under investigation."

4. The detaining authority stated in the last paragraph of the detention order that the respondent was being supplied the grounds of detention in Punjabi (Gurmukhi script) together with an English translation thereof and the "supporting material forming the base of the grounds of detention". The "supporting material", by which is meant particulars of the grounds of detention, was supplied to the respondent along with the grounds. These particulars consist of what is alleged to be a report of the speeches made by the respondent, as recorded by the C. I. D. branch of the Punjab Police. The particulars of which an English translation was produced in the High Court at Ext. A1 read thus :

"While speaking he said that on July 2 by bringing B. S. F., Punjab Police and other Police the unarmed Nihangs were fired at. There is no count as to how many of then were killed, because no roll call is taken of the Sikhs; how many came and how many went.

Further said that in Punjab hundreds of innocent Sikhs have been made the target of bullets. The Government has seen that the Sikhs go away after paying homage to the martyrs. Now we will ha















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top