- (1.) Criminal Appeal No. 317 of 1986 arises out of the judgment and order of the High Court of Patna and the Writ Petition No. 316 is in respect of the same detenu. Both these challenge the order of detention dated 2nd Jan. 1986 passed by the respondent No. 1, The District Magistrate Dhanbad in respect of the petitioner under S. 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980, hereinafter called the 'Act' on the ground that the petitioner's activities were prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Several criminal cases had been filed against the petitioner between 3rd Jan. 1983 to 18th Feb. 1985. On or about 2nd Jan. 1985 the order of detention was passed on an incident relating to the exchange of fire between two rival groups. The order states the grounds as follows : 1. On 24-12-1985, between 10 and 10.30 A.M. the subject along with Ramashish Bangali, Gulam, Rambriksha armed with Rifle, gun etc. came in Car No. BHG-9372 on Katras Coal Dump and started indiscriminate firing to kill Birendra Pratap Singh a rival of his clandestine business of coal to establish his criminal superiority in full view of the shopkeepers, customers and passers-by of the area. Birendra Pratap Singh and his associates who were there also returned the firing in same manner. As a result of this firing one innocent namely Brahamdeo Mishra was killed. The exchange of indiscriminate firing in the main market area of Katras created great panic and alarm in the area. The normal tempo of life was completely disturbed. The people started running helter and skelter for their lives. Shopkeepers put down their shutters. Doors and windows were closed. The vehicular traffic came to halt. This refers to Katras P.S. Case No. 331/85 dated 24-12-85- u/s 149/307/326 IPC/27 Arms Act. Besides the aforesaid ground the following cases are also referred hereunder as background to show the criminality of the subject. 1. Katras P.S. Case No. 5/83 dated 3-1-83 u/s 147, 341/353/307 I.P.C. In this case subject and his associates tried to set free the truck and driver from the police custody by force and when he failed in his attempt he threatened the police officer and CISF Personnel to do away with their lives, C.S. No. 5/83 has already been submitted in this case. 2. Katras P.S. Case No. 303/83 u/s 147/148/452/323 IPC. ............................ In this case subject and his associates went to the tailoring shop of Saukat Ansari and asked him to keep his clothes ready by 9-10-83 and on his refusal, he assaulted him in presence of customers and others C.S. No. 196/83 has already been submitted in this case. 3. Jogta P.S. Case No. 22/84 dated 11-3-84 u/s 147/148, 307/326/353/333/324/325 I.P.C./27 Arms Act. ............................ In this case subject and his associates opened fire on police party who went to apprehend Raghunath Singh absconder under NSA. As a result of this indiscriminate firing by him and his associates one Police Officer namely Shri R. K. Verma, received serious head, injury and is still incapable to work. Charge sheet No. 25/84 has already been submitted in this case. 4. Jogta P.S. Case No. 9/85 dated 18-2-85 u/s 369, 307/323/324/176/34 I.P.C/27 Arms Act. In this case Sisir Rajan Das, who was coming in a religious procession on the eve of Shivratri and was dancing in the role of Shiva was compelled by his associates to dance before the marriage party of subject's sister. Sri Sisir Rajan Das, however, acceded to their request and started dancing. When he was dancing some of the members opened fire on him as a result of which he fell down. The subject and his associates however put his body in his car and fled away. Neither Shri Das nor his body could be traced out till date. Charge sheet No. 20/85 has already been submitted in this case. (Emphasis supplied) 5. Jogta P.S. Case No. 68/85 dated 1 -12-85 u/s 341/34 IPC. In this case subject threatened Sri Krishana Ballav Sahay, General Secretary, Colliery Shramik Sangh, Sijua, to do away with his life if he takes out any procession or oppose him.
(2.) It is the case of the detenu that the order of detention was made on one incident relating to exchange of fire between two rival groups. A criminal case had been registered in relation to the said incident pursuant to which the petitioner was already in custody. The order of detention though dated 2nd Jan. 1986 was served on or about 11th Jan. 1986. It is the case of the appellant / petitioner that the detenu was not served with all the documents referred to and/or relied on. The detenu was served with order of approval of the said order of detention by the Government of Bihar. The petitioner/appellant made representation on 22nd Jan. 1986 and the petitioner / appellant was informed that the said representation was rejected. Thereafter the petitioner / appellant's matter was referred to the Advisory Board. The petitioner / appellant states that he desired that he should be heard in person by the Advisory Board.' The petitioner / appellant submits that he was produced before the Advisory Board but he was not given any hearing. By letter dated 22nd Feb. 1986 the petitioner / appellant was informed that the Advisory Board had confirmed the order of detention. The petitioner / appellant thereafter filed a writ petition in the High Court of Patna which was dismissed without any speaking order.
(3.) The grounds of challenge are all stated in the writ petition as well as special leave petition. The petitioner / appellant was in detention when the petitioner / appellant was served with the order of detention. There were criminal cases against the petitioner. There was a murder case in respect of Crime No. 331 of 1985. In the said case investigation was in progress and the defence of the petitioner in the murder case was that he was falsely implicated and was not at all concerned with the murder. When the order was passed, the petitioner had not surrendered but when the order was served, the petitioner had already surrendered in respect of the criminal charge against him. At the relevant time the petitioner was undertrial in the said criminal case.;