M.C.JAIN, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has challenged the detention order dated 24 -5 -2005, passed against him by respondent No. 2, District Magistrate, Rampur, under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 and his continued detention thereunder.
(2.) THE grounds of detention are contained in Annexure -1 to the writ petition. They are based on an incident dated 3 -2 -2005 of about 11 a.m. which occurred in Mohalla Kunda, near Zeeno Wali Masjid, P.S. Kotwali, District Rampur with regard to which an F.I.R. (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) was lodged by Tauquir alias Javed son of Mahmood Ahmad the same day at 11.15 a.m. The petitioner and his brothers allegedly committed the double murder of Khushnud @ Shahid and his brother Iqtedar alias Mujahid by indiscriminate shooting. They were constructing a balcony in their house to which the petitioner and his brothers objected while shooting them dead. After committing the double murder, the petitioner and his brothers, offering threats to all around, went inside their house with their respective weapons. As a consequence of this dare devilry crime committed by the petitioner and his brothers, women folk and young girls stopped coming out from their houses and moving about. The grounds of detention say that due to this double murder committed by the petitioner and his brothers in broad daylight, an atmosphere of panic and terror was created in the entire area. People ran helter -skelter. Shopkeepers left their shops. Inhabitants of the area concealed themselves inside their houses out of fear. After the incident, till 12 -2 -2005 police force had to be deployed in the area to infuse sense of security in public and for the maintenance of public order. The details of deployment of police force were also given in the grounds of detention. The detaining authority further stated in the grounds of detention that the petitioner was detained in jail in connection with the said crime but had moved bail application before the Sessions Judge, Rampur on 13 -5 -2005 which was listed for hearing on 25 -5 -2005. There was great likelihood of his being released on bail and indulging in similar criminal activities, prejudicial to maintenance of public order. It, therefore, necessitated the passing of the detention order against him under the National Security Act. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. We have heard Shri Imran Ullah, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Arvind Tripathi learned A.G.A. representing respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 and Shri R.D. Tripathi, learned Counsel for Union of India -respondent No. 4.
(3.) IT has first been argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that he (petitioner) is an editor by profession and he exposed a lot of criminal and illegal activities of officials in Kunda. As such he has been falsely implicated. It has been urged that, in any view of the matter, the incident on the basis of which the impugned detention order has been passed was only a law and order problem having nothing to do with public order. The argument has been countered vehemently by the learned A.G.A.;