- (1.) M. Katju, J. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order of detention dated 26-9-2001 passed under the National Security Act. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) A perusal of the grounds of detention shows that it is alleged therein that on 8-6-2001 the petitioner with his brother and associates came with guns and shot one Santosh Kumar on his chest due to which he fell down and died. This created terror and panic in the locality and people shut their houses and a case under Section 302, IPC was registered. The said incident occurred in a congested locality, which created terror in the public, and public order was disturbed. It is also alleged that on 3-5-2000 the petitioner shot at one Ramji when he had come to appear before the Court and a case under Section 307 IPC was registered against him. On 14-5-1998 the petitioner had given shelter to some anti-social elements who had guns, and when the Police party arrived at the spot the petitioner and his four associates fired at the Police. The Police had recovered the petitioner's rifle. A case under Section 307 IPC, has also been registered in this connection. On 28-5- 1997 at 3. 35 p. m. the petitioner and his associates shot dead one Shyam Sharma and a case under Section 302/307 IPC has been registered in this connection. On 23-7-1997 at 7. 15 p. m. the petitioner attempted to kill one Yugal Kishore and Maharaj Singh and a case under Section 307 IPC had been registered. Petitioner's gun licence was cancelled but he has not deposited his gun due to which a case under Section 25/30 Arms Act has been registered. Thus it is alleged that petitioner has committed several crimes and he is trying to obtain bail. It is also alleged that petitioner is getting Gunda tax collected from the people in the locality. He has threatened the villagers that if anybody gave evidence against him the people will be burnt and will be killed. Hence the District Magistrate was satisfied that petitioner's activities are pre-judicial to public order.
(3.) WE are satisfied that petitioner has disturbed public order and not merely law and order. The large number of serious cases against the petitioner show that he is a hardened criminal, and creates terror in the public. Learned Counsel for the petitioner then submitted that the petitioner was in jail since 15-6-2001 and his bail application has been rejected by the Court of Sessions on 26-7-2001 as stated in paragraph 21 of the petition. Hence it is alleged that the detention order is illegal.;