R.R.K.TRIVEDI, J. - (1.) Petitioner, Sushil Kumar Singh, by means of this petition, has challenged the order dated 11-11-1999, passed by District Magistrate, Varanasi under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, hereinafter referred to 'Act' under which petitioner has been detained. Along with order of detention, petitioner was also served grounds of detention on which basis District Magistrate, respondent No. 1, formed his subjective satisfaction to detain petitioner. The grounds of detention, as stated in Annexure 2 to the writ petition, are being mentioned hereunder :- (1) That on 20th Oct. 1999, at 4.30 p.m. Chandra Bhushan Singh alias Chhallu Singh, resident of village Dharaurha, Police Station Chaubepur, district Varanasi along wih Shiv Shanker Singh was going to his village on scooter. When they crossed Munari Bazar and were on way to their village, petitioner along with his companions Kamlesh Singh and Rajesh Singh came from behind on a Maruti car No. U.P. No. 65M8998, overtook the scooter and with intention to kill, fired at Chandra Bhushan, Singh and Shiv Shanker Singh from automatic cirearms. In this firing, Shiv Shanker Singh was hit and he fell down and died but Chandra Bhushan Singh escaped and ran towards nearby heap of bricks. He was chased by petitioner and his companions and was fired at in the same manner and was seriously injured. Thereafter petitioner and his companiess leflt the scene of occurrence, asuming him to be dead, by same Maruti car. By this firing, fear and terror prevailed over the entire market including the town and among residents and shopkeeprs on the highway and the public order was badly distubred., Shopkeepers of the main road closed their shops . People ran helter skelter and hid themselves at safer places. A First Information Report of this incident was lodged at Police Station Chaubepur which was registered as Case Crime No. 185 of 1999, under Sections 302/307, I.P.C. (2) It is further stated that since 1995, petitioner is indulging in criminal activities. On 5-7-1995, he along with several persons had beaten Indra Raman Yadav and had also stolen his articles, With regard to this incident, a First Information Report was lodged which was registered as Case Crime No. 85 of 1995 under Sections 147, 341, 323, 504, 506 and 379, I.P.C. but the case was ultimately closed for want of evidence as no body came forward on account of the pressure of petitioner. (3) That on 17-7-1997, petitioner threatened and terrorised Kamlesh Nath Singh of village Makharia, Police Station Tarwa, district Azamgarh at ANDHURA PUL in respect of which case was registered at Police Station Chetganj, District Varanasi as Case Crime No. 144 of 1997 under Sections 504, 506, I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act. After investigation, charge sheet was filed and case is still pending consideration in the Court. (4) That on 2-12-1997, with intention to kill Sri Pancham Shukla, resident of village Dejepur, Police Station Jansa fires at him and abused and gave him threat of life. Case was registered at Police Station Jansa as Case Crime No. 293 of 1997 under Sections 307, 504, 506, I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act. As no body came forward to give evidence on account of fear and pressure of petitioner, a final report was submitted. (5) That on 17-2-1998, petitioner beat Kamla Shankar Yadav, abused and terriorise him in respect of which a case was registered as Case Crime No. 50A of 1998,under Sections 147, 323, 504 and 506, I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed in Court and case is pending. (6) That on 6-8-1999, petitioner and his companions forcibly abducted Prem Chandra Gupa in respect of which case was registered at Police Station Surlyawa, district Sant Ravidas Nagar as Case Crime No. 163 of 1998, under Section 364, I.P.C. However, on account of the fear and pressure of petitioner and his companions no body dare are to give evidence and ultimately a final report was submitted. (7) That on 19-1-1999, petitioner along with his companions committed crime in district Ghazipur in respect of which case was registered at Police Station Nandganj as Case Crime No. 82 of 1999, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, I.P.C. and Case Crime No. 83 of 1999 under Sections 25/27, Arms Act. After investigation charge sheet has been submitted in Court and case is pending. (8) That on 19th Jan. 1999, as Arun Kumar Singh refused to pay Goonda Tax petitioner and your companions threatened him to be killed by pistol and terrorised him. In respect of this incident, a First Information Report was lodged at Police Station Kotwali, district Ghazipur registered as Case Crime No. 24 of 1999, under Sections 147, 149, 506, I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed and case is pending in Court.
(2.) It has been further stated that the petitioner is a habitual and notorious criminal. He has close friendship with criminals. Petitioner and his father Udai Nath Singh alias Chulbul are history sheeters, his uncle and father are members of inter State mafia gangs . On account of the criminal activities of petitioner , a terror is prevailing in district Varanasi and adjoining district Ghazipur and Sant Ravi Das Nagar and at several other places. He is frequently indulging in heinious offences like murder, attempt to murder rioting etc.
(3.) That on account of incident dated 20th Oct. 1999 committed by petitioner and his companions in which one person died and another was seriously injured, terror prevailed in the locality and in surrounding areas, public order has been badly disturbed. The effect of the heinous murder is till lomming large in the minds of the persons of the locality and they are under fear and terror. In connection with this incident, petitioner was arrested on 21st Oct. 1990 and presently he is lodged in District Jail, Varanasi and he is trying seriously for his release on bail. There is strong possibility of petitioner being released on bail and if he comes out from jail, there is serious apprehension that he shall again indulge himself in similar activities, which shall be highly prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order in the area. On basis of the aforesaid grounds respondent No. 1 recorded his satisfaction that in order to prevent petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it is necessary to make an order directing detention of the petitioner.;