BUDHA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRIMINAL Writ Petition No. 1517 of 1998 has been filed by Budha Singh detenu for quashing the detention order Annexure P-1 bearing No. 5775 dated June 7, 1988. It is alleged therein that in connection with First Information Report No. 21 registered in Police Station Valtoha district Amritsar under Sections 411/414 of the Indian Penal Code, section 95 of the Arms Act and section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 on February 29, 1988 the petitioner was arrested on May 27, 1988, that while the petitioner was still in custody, detention Order Annexure P-1 was served upon him on June 7, 1988. According to the petitioner, the detention order was passed by the detaining authority without its subjective satisfaction in a mechanical manner without application of mind, that the representation filed by the petitioner against his detention having not been decided as yet, there is an obvious violation of Article 22 of the Constitution of India and that the detention is bad because provisions of section 3(5) of the National Security Act have not been compiled with.

(2.) IN reply filed on September 16. 1988 respondent No. 1 asserted that the representation filed petitioner on July 77, 1988 was declined by it on August 17, 1988 and the petitioner was apprised of it on the same date, that Article 22 of the Constitution as also section 3(5) of the National Security Act have not been violated and that the impugned detention order was passed by the detaining authority on its subjective satisfaction.

(3.) IN para 3 of the detention order the detaining authority observed, "That this order has been passed by me being conscious of the fact that Sh. Budha Singh is already in judicial custody in the cases registered against him. Budha Singh is taking steps to get himself released front the custody and there is every likelihood of his being set at liberty, and in that event he is likely to indulge in prejudicial activities in view of his prima facie propensity towards such activities and thus there is compelling necessity to pass the detention order against him though he is in judicial custody at Present. "Detenu admittedly did not take any steps to get himself released from the custody and, therefore, had the detaining authority been apprised of it, may have not passed the detention order Annexure P-1. There was thus want of application of mind by the detaining authority on this score. Order Annexure P-1 thus falls through on this score.