MANVEER Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BULANDSHAHR
LAWS(ALL)-2003-5-38
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on May 22,2003

MANVEER Appellant
VERSUS
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BULANDSHAHR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) U. S. Tripathi, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing his detention order dated 10-8-2002 passed by District Magistrate, Bulandshahr, respondent No. 1 under Section 3 (2) of National Security Act.
(2.) THOUGH the detention order was challenged on various grounds, but the learned Counsel for the petitioner has confined his argument only on two points, (1) The representation of the petitioner was not decided by the Central Government, which infringed his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India; and (2) the statements of prosecution witnesses were recorded subsequently and the witnesses turned hostile and did not support the case of prosecution and it shows that detaining authority has not applied his mind. Since for decision of above two points, the detailed facts of the case on the basis of which detention order is passed is not essential we are not adverting to the facts of the case in detail. We have heard Sri J. S. Sengar assisted by Sri Ajit Kumar Singh Solanki, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA and learned Standing Counsel and have gone through the record.
(3.) REGARDING non decision of representation of the petitioner by the Central Government, it was alleged in para 26 of the petition that against the detention orders, the petitioner submitted representation through Jail Superintendent to the detaining authority through Jail Superintendent to the detaining authority, State Government, Advisory Board and Union of India. In para 28 it was alleged that the petitioner was informed through letter dated 20-9-2002 by Sri V. K. Gupta, Additional Secretary, Union of India that the Union of India rejected the representation of the petitioner, but it has not stated a word that as to when the representation of the petitioner was rejected by the Union of India. In para 30 it was alleged that there is considerable delay in deciding representation of the petitioner on the part of Union of India. In para 6 of his counter-affidavit Sri C. P. Tripathi, Deputy Jailor, District Jail, Bulandshahar disclosed that the petitioner has submitted his representation to the Jail Authorities on 23-8-2002 and on same day the said representation was sent to District Magistrate, Bulandshahar for further action in the matter. Second time, the petitioner has submitted another representation in eight copies to the Jail Authorities on 29-8-2002, which was sent to District Magistrate, Bulandshahar on same day for further action.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.