TAKRU, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus directing the release of the petitioner who has been detained under S. 3 (1) (a) (ii) of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950, as amended from time to time. 2. In order to appreciate the various points arising out of the impugned detention order a brief statement of the facts leading upto it are very necessary. 3. The petitioner was the printer, publisher and editor of an Urdu daily known as Siyasat in Kanpur. Sometime in May or June 1956 a literary and cultural institution of Bombay known as Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan republished a book entitled Religious Leaders. This book had been written by two American authors and had been in circulation in a number of countries since 1941. There is no gainsaying that this book contains some highly objectionable and provocative passages about the- character and dignity of the Prophet Mohammad which are likely to injure and hurt and in fact did injure and hurt the feelings of the Muslims including the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, with the avowed intention of getting the said book prescribed started a very spirited propaganda in his daily - the Siyasat, - quoting objectionable passages from the said book, accompanied at times with his own articles and comments thereon and preceded by prominent head lines designed to catch the attention of the reading public. The first of such publications appeared in the Siyasat of 28th August 1956 and they were repeated almost without any, break till 10-9-1956. The offending passages having meanwhile come to the knowledge of the Registrar of the aforesaid Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan he issued a communication which was published in the Pioneer of 4th September, 1956, expressing his regrets for the publication of the said book and ordering its prompt withdrawal from circulation. Sri K. M. Munshi the then Rajyapal of Uttar Pradesh and general editor of the said Bhawan also issued a communication which was published in the Pioneer dated 6th of September, 1956 expressing his regrets for the said publication and assuring everybody concerned that he himself had the highest respect for the Prophet of Islam and his teachings and that he had ordered the withdrawal of the said publication forthwith. All these expressions of regrets and assurances about the prompt withdrawal of the offending book from circulation did not however succeed in achieving the desired result, because, as we have said above, the petitioner continued with his writings till 16th of September, 1956. On the night of 16th September, 1956 the petitioner was arrested by the Sisaman police Kanpur for committing breach of an order promulgated under S. 144, Cr. P. C. and was remanded to jail custody by a first class Magistrate of Kanpur the following day. The petitioner applied unsuccessfully for bail both before the Magistrate as well as the Sessions Judge en 25th September and 5th October, 1956 respectively. An application for bail was then moved on his behalf in this Court but was alleged to have been with drawn as he had been ordered to be detained under the Preventive Detention Act. Thereafter on 9th November, 1956 the police submitted a charge sheet against the petitioner under Ss. 147, 353, 332, 356 and 188, I. P. C. before a first class Magistrate of Kanpur but his trial under those sections has been held up for one reason or the other which need not concern us in the present proceedings. The position, therefore, is that the petitioner is at the moment under detention both under the ordinary law as well as the Preventive Detention Act. 4. In completing this narrative we have, we are afraid, gone a little beyond the date on which the petitioner, was detained under the impugned detention order viz., 5th October, 1956. Three days later - i.e., on 8th October, 1956 - the petitioner was served with the statutory notice under S. 7 of the Preventive Detention Act (Act 4 of 1950) as amended from time to time. This detention order was subsequently confirmed on 1st of December, 1956 by the Advisory Board constituted under S. 8 of the said Act and the petitioner was informed by the Home Secretary of the U. P. Government on the 21st of December, 1956 that the Governor of U. P. had sanctioned the petitioners detention for a period of 12 months from the date of his detention. 5. Having concluded our narrative of the material facts with which we are concerned in the present proceedings, we shall now return to the notice which was given to the petitioner under S. 7 of the Preventive Detention Act on 8th of October, 1956 and inasmuch as it was assailed on a number of grounds by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, we propose to quote all the material parts of it in full. The said notice which is marked Annexure A and is to be found on page 29 onwards of the paper book after stating the usual preamble, runs as follows : "Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provisions of S. 7 of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (No. 4 of 1950) as amended from time to time, you Sri Ishaq, Ilmi are hereby informed that the grounds for your detention are, as stated below : 1. That you have with a view to promote communal hatred among them exploited the religious sentiments of the Muslims by working them up to a communal frenzy over republication of the book entitled Religious Leaders by the Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan, Bombay. Although this book was written by American authors H. Thomas and Dana Lee Thomas and published in the year 1941 and has been in circulation since then in many countries, the Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan republished it only two months ago. You have started and fomented intensive agitation among Muslim masses since 28-8-56 over the said republication through the columns of daily paper Siyasat of which you have been the Editor and Publisher. You have incited communal feelings of the Muslims by publishing provocative matters through the said daily with the object of promoting communal hatred among the Muslims, created disaffection and discontent among the Muslim, towards the Government and persisted in activities calculated to disturb the public peace and tranquillity, in spite of the fact that the Publisher and the General Editor have expressed their unqualified regret and also stopped sale of the said book and withdrawn its unsold copies.
(2.) THE specific instances of the matter that you have published in the Siyasat to incite the Muslims to commit breaches of the peace are enumerated below : (a) In the issues of Daily Siyasat dated 28-8-56, 30-8-56 and 31-8-56 you deliberately reproduced those extracts from the biography of Prophet Mohammad in the Book Religious Leaders which you considered to be objectionable and not fit for publication, under highly provocative and inciting headlines along with your comments and Urdu translation of the original English text and thereby gave undue publicity to the extracts referred to above with the object of creating communal bitterness among the Muslims. (The relevant portions are enclosed in red lines in the attached copies of the Siyasat dated 28-8-56, 30-8-56 and 31-8-56.) (b) You published a provocative appeal to the Muslims under inflammatory and provocative headlines in the issue of Daily Siyasat dated 29-8-56 at page 1 exhorting the Muslims to launch vigorous agitation to organise strikes, stage fearless and courageous demonstrations and hold meetings in the mosques on 31st August, 1956, after prayers to protest against the aforesaid book, and pass resolutions urging the Government to dismiss Sri K. M. Munshi from his office and to take the action to punish him and proscribe the aforesaid book. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of Daily Siyasat dated 29-8-56). (c) That you published an inflammatory statement alleged to have been made by one Abdul Rashid of Baisatkhana Kanpur at page 1 of the Daily Siyasat, dated 30th August 1956, under provocative headlines. The statement was to the effect that death was preferable to tolerance of insults to the Prophet and that the Muslims of the area in which Sri Abdul Rashid resided were full of anger and excitement over the matter published in the Book (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of Siyasat dated 30-8-56.) (d) That you published a statement alleged to have been made by Sri Saidullah Khan Rizvi in the daily Siyasat, dated 31-8-56 at page 4 under provocative and inciting head-lines to the effect that this insulting and heart-breaking publication has left a permanent sore on the hearts of the Muslims and it is one more instance of black deeds of the Congress regime and that Muslims should not allow repetition of such acts. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of Daily Siyasat dated 31-8-56). (e) That you published a news item in the daily Siyasat dated 1-9-56 at page 2, under highly provocative headlines to the effect that Muslims should sacrifice their lives, property etc., rather than tolerate even slightest insult to the Prophet and their religion and culture. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the daily Siyasat dated 1-9-56). (f) That you published in the daily Siyasat, dated 1-9-56 at page 4, a statement under highly provocative and inflammatory headlines alleging that the publication of the said book, and education of Muslim children in Government schools, through the books which contain matter likely to affect adversely their religious teaching and beliefs are in pursuance of deep-laid conspiracy. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of Siyasat dated 1-9-56). (g) That you published an article in the Daily Siyasat dated 2-9-56 at page 1 under provocative headlines exhorting the Muslims to observe general strike on 7-9-56 throughout the country, fly black flags over shops and houses, wear black badges, hold meetings after Jumma prayers, vigorously agitate for legal action against the General Editor for proscription of the said book and continue agitation until their demands were conceded. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of Siyasat dated 2-9-56). (h) That you published the inflammatory speeches delivered by you and Sarvasri Vimal Mehrotra, S. K. D. Paliwal, Shamshe Ninai, Saidullah Khan in a meeting convened by you in Mohammad Ali Park on 2-9-56, in the Daily Siyasat dated 3-9-56 at pages 1 and 4 under inciting headlines. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of Siyasat dated 3-5-56). (i) That you published a news item in the daily Siyasat dated 3-9-56 at page 4 under provocative headlines propagating that the agitation was spreading like wide fire and should not cease until their demands for dismissal of Sri K. M. Munshi and proscription of the book were conceded. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of Siyasat dated 3-9-56). (j) That you published editorial in the Daily Siyasat dated 4-9-56 at page 2 under provocative headlines that the Government was only secular in name and not in its actions, that it was of the major community, i.e., Hindus, specially of Brahmins, and that the Army was non-secular in its composition as the number of Muslims in the Defence Forces was going down day by day. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 4-9-56). (k) That you published an article in the Siyasat dated 4-9-56 at page 4 under inflammatory headlines exhorting the Muslims to continue the agitation until their demands were met. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 4-9-56). (l) That you published news items in the daily Siyasat dated 5-9-56 at page 1 under alarming and inflammatory headlines that communal disturbances had occurred at Agra and Moradabad and that refugees had been aggressor in the riot at Agra and that communalists had created disturbances in a meeting organised by Muslims to express their resentment over the book at Moradabad resulting in one death or injury to one man and the arrest of Maulana Qasim, who addressed the meeting. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines of the attached copy of the Siyasat, dated 5-9-1956). (m) That you published a news item in the Daily Siyasat dated 6-9-1956 on page 1 under inciting headlines about the agitation and taking out of a procession by Muslim students of Orai and their shouting of slogans "K. M. Munshi Murdabad", "Governor U. P. Pursi Chhore". This news was published at a time when communal tension was rapidly increasing. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat, dated. 6-9-1956). (n) That you published a news item in the daily Siyasat dated 6-9-1956 on page 2 under provocative headlines eulogising the action of Muslim students of Aligarh University, imputing motives to Jan Sanghis Of Delhi and certain papers of defaming the Muslim students for the agitation and demonstration organised by them and inciting the Muslim students to continue the agitation until the demands were fulfilled. This news was given publicity at a time when the atmosphere was surcharged with communal bitterness. (The relevant portions are enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of Siyasat dated 6-9-1956). (o) That you published an article in the daily Siyasat dated 6-9-1956 at page 4 under inciting headlines exhorting the Muslims to volunteer for offering satyagrah at the house of Sri K. M. Munshi in order to force him to resign and also to offer satyagrah at the house of the Prime Minister and at the Parliament House in case Sri K. M. Munshi did not resign or was not dismissed. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 6-9-1956). (p) That you published a news item in the daily Siyasat, dated 8-9-1956, at page 1 under alarming headlines that Jan Sanghis had held a meeting at Mau on 31-8-1956, in which they had raised slogans khun ka badla khun and planned for a serious riot in the town and that after the said meeting the Hindus had attacked members of the other community and that one man was killed and several others injured as a result of the riot, (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat, dated 8-9-1956). (q) That you published a news item in the daily Siyasat, dated 9-9-1956 at page 4 under inflammatory headlines that the communal disturbances at Moradabad, Orai, Gorakhpur and Bahraich had occurred in which peaceful Muslims had been attacked by Hindus as a result of which several persons had been killed and arrested. This news item was published when bitter communal feelings had been created between the two communities by you through your agitation. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 9-9-1956). (r) That you published an article in the daily Siyasat dated 11-9-1956, at page 1 under highly provocative headlines that the spirit of Godse had entered the souls of those who were against this agitation and if the Muslims would yield to intimidation they would not be able to say even Namaz. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 11-9-1956). (s) That you published an article in the daily Siyasat dated 12-9-1956 at page 1 under inflammatory headlines that the agitation should continue although the Congress, the Hindu Mahasabha and Jan Sangh have been trying to suppress it. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 12-9-1956). (t) That you published a news item at page 4 of the daily Siyasat dated 13-9-1956 under inciting headlines laying the responsibility for communal riots on the Government and Hindu communal organizations, alleging that they have defamed the Muslims. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 13-9-1956). (u) That you published a news item at page 4 of the daily Siyasat dated 14-9-1956 under provocative headlines and charged the Government officials with communal bias against the Muslims and held them to be responsible for fanning communal disturbances. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 14-9-1956). (v) That you published a news item under inciting headlines in the daily Siyasat dated 15-9-1956 at page 2 that a narrow minded and communal class existed in this country which believed that by insulting the religious leaders and wounding the religious beliefs of other communities they were doing a great national service. It has further been alleged that in the Congress regime in which religious protection has been assured the hearts of the people, evidently referring the Muslims are being broken. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 15-9-1956). (w) That you published an alarming news item in the daily Siyasat dated 16-9-1956 at page 1 under inciting and alarming headlines that the Jan Sangh and Hindu Mahasabha have started communal disturbances with the connivance of the Congress and that after Orai, Moradabad Jabalpur and other places, Aligarh has been made their target. In the meetings and processions, it was alleged heart-breaking communal slogans were shouted and communal bitterness created. It was further asserted that in a Varanasi meeting it was proposed to rename Aligarh as "Argun Garh" and Muslim University as Arya Vishwa Vidyalaya. (The relevant portions are enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat, dated 16-9-1956). (x) That you published an alarming news item, at page 2 of the daily Siyasat dated 16-9-1956 under provocative headlines about the communal riot at Aligarh in which you accused Hindu students of Aligarh for their high handedness and precipitating communal riots in pursuance of a pre-arranged plan and also attributed inflammatory statements and objectionable slogans to them. (The relevant portion is enclosed in red lines in the attached copy of the Siyasat dated 16-9-1956.) That as a consequence of incitement and provocation given to the Muslims by rabidly communal and inflammatory head-lines, news items and comments published in the Siyasat as mentioned in para 2 and the agitation started by you in the State, a number of incidents involving breaches of peace and public tranquillity took place in several towns of U. P., as mentioned below : (a) That Daily Siyasat containing incitement to the Muslims was received in Aligarh on the morning of August 30, 1956. A general meeting of the Intermediate students of the Muslim University was held on 30th August, 1956, and speeches were made to the effect that the whole of the Islamic world was disturbed. On the 31st August, 1956 a meeting of the Aligarh Muslim Union was held. Resolutions were passed and the students took out a procession in which slogans of Pakistan Zindabad were shouted, which shows the extent to which feelings of the Muslims were roused by the matter published by you. On the same date at a post prayer meeting presiding over by Sri Shabbir Khan highly inflammatory speeches were made. These meetings and the procession gave rise to a strong wave of resentment among all other communities at Aligarh and there was a general feeling that the activities of the Muslims were treacherous and seditious. It was felt that a book which was published long ago had suddenly been utilized to incite the communal feelings of the Muslims. Muslim mobs at Aligarh were worked up to a frenzy by the statement made by you that Sri K. M. Munshi was guilty of a most dirty offence against the whole Islamic world. On the 1st of September, 1956, the boys of the schools attached to the Muslim University took out effigies of Sri K. M. Munshi in a procession. The girls of the Girls College attached to the Muslim University also went out in a procession shouting slogans Pakistan Zindabad and Congress Raj Murdabad. On the same day a group of students gathered in the Polytechnic Section of the University and burnt the effigy of Sri K. M. Munshi and shoutted slogans Hans ke liya hai Pakistan, Lar ke lenge Hindustan Pakistan Zindabad. As a result of subsequent matter published in the Siyasat between 4th and 6th September, 1956 in which appeals were also made to observe hartal on September 7, display of black flags and wear black badges, a meeting was held in Jama Masjid on September 6, 1956, under the auspices of Muslim Jammat, and call for a hartal on 7th September 1956, was given. Accordingly a hartal took place on September 7, 1956, provocative meetings and processions were organised in which anti-national and anti-Government slogans were shouted, which incited the feelings of other communities and created a tense situation. As a counter-agitation, a combined meeting of Hindu Mahasabha, Bhartiya Jan Sangh, Ram Rajya Parishad, R.S.S. Sangh and Arya Samaj was held on September 11, 1956, in which the Muslims were held to be responsible for communal disturbances at Agra, Muradabad, Mau, Orai, Bara Banki and bomb explosions at Delhi. On September 14, 1956, a procession of students (except Muslim University students) paraded the town shouting, among others, the slogan "Panchmargi Bharat Chhoro" (fifth columnists leave the country). While this procession was passing through the Bazar, the Muslims showered brick-bats as a result of which a communal riot took place in Aligarh. These incidents in Aligarh culminating into a communal riot are clearly attributable to the communal frenzy created among the Muslims by you. (b) That at Orai the Muslims became communally excited on reading inciting news published by you in the Siyasat dated the 30th August 1956. A procession of the Muslims was taken on September 1, 1956, to the residence of the District Magistrate in the evening and on the same day a meeting of the Muslims was held in Mohalla Athai. Resolutions were passed which criticised Sri K. M. Munshi and demanded a ban on the book and legal action against the Publisher. As a result of the processions and the meeting communal bitterness pervaded the town. The Siyasat dated 3-9-56 told the Muslims to observe complete hartal, organize public meetings, wear black bands on arms, and hoist black flags on September 7, 1956. On the 7th September, 56 the Muslims displayed black flags on their houses and shops and wore black bands on their arms. Some Muslim students of Government Intermediate College, Orai, attended their classes with black bands on their arms but absented themselves from the prayers, which was resented by the Hindu students who left the College at 11-30 A.M. and formed a procession which started shouting among others, the following slogans : "Pakistan Murdabad." "Kale Jhande Phank do." "Pakistani Gunda Shahi Nahin Chalegi." "Legi Musalmano Bharat Chhoro." When the procession passed by the Nabi ki Masjid some students hauled down a black flag from a shop. Some Muslims came out of the adjoining lanes and stabbed some students. In the rioting that ensued one Bishambhar Dayal Raizada a prominent citizen of Orai, was stabbed to death, which caused anger among the Hindus, particularly refugees, who looted some shops and stabbed some persons. As a result of rioting eight persons lost their lives. The Muslims at Orai were aggressors in committing serious acts of violence due to communal frenzy and excitement created by your agitation and publication in the Siyasat. (c) That the Muslims of Moradabad started communal agitation on the 2nd of September 1956, after leading bitterly communal and inflammatory matter published by you in the Siyasat. The Muslims held a meeting on the 2nd of September 1956 in which highly inciting speeches were made. A Hindu youth present in the meeting stood up and protested against the anti-national speech of one of the speakers. Violence was used against him and a case of rioting was registered, as consequence of which some Muslims were arrested on September 6, 1956. A mob of agitated Muslims raided the Kotwali where the arrested persons were detained. The Muslims were dispersed with a lathi charge. Thereafter stray incidents of stabbing and marpit took place throughout the city and curfew had to be imposed. (d) That as a result of bitterly communal and inciting articles published in the Siyasat of Kanpur by you a procession of Muslims students was taken out in Agra city on 3rd September 1956. This was followed by another procession of Muslims, which reached the Sheo Market shouting, among others, the slogan Pakistan Zindabad which was resented by the refugees on whom some processionists threw brickbats, as a result of which one refugee was injured. Thirteen of the processionists were arrested at the spot. (e) That the Muslims at Bareilly were communally excited on reading the daily Siyasat dated the 29th and the) 30th August 1956, which were read out to the Muslims by the workers of Jammat Raza Mustafa, Bereilly and held a number of meetings in various mohallas inciting frenzy and bitterness. On September 7, 1956 a procession of Muslims shouted anti-national slogans Hindustan Murdabad Pakistan Zindabad. About the same time some members of the Hindu Mahasabha, Bhartiya Jan Sangh and a number of refugees started counter demonstration and shouted counter slogans. At the crossing of Maniharan ki Gali when the Muslims were returning from Jumma Prayer, there was exchange of hot words between them and the Hindus, which resulted in brick-batting between the sides resulting in injuries to 24 persons. (f) That on account of the communal frenzy created among the Muslims by publication of inciting matter by you in the Siyasat in respect of the book Religious Leaders protest meetings were held in most of the mosques of Kanpur city on 21st August 1956, after Jumma prayers. Oaths were taken from the Muslims that they would always be ready to sacrifice themselves and their children and would be ready to face bullets of the police. A public meeting was held inside the Idgah (Faithfulganj) from 2 to 4 P.M. on 31st August 1956 the sentiments of the Muslims present were whipped into communal frenzy by the inflammatory speeches exhorting them that the forefathers had killed those persons, who had insulted their prophet and religion. In this meeting a loudspeaker was used without any permission with the result that that a case under Section 118 of the Cantonment Act has been registered against the organizers of the meeting and those who spoke at the meeting. Two public meetings one each at Mohd Ali Park and Faithfulganj were held on the 2nd of September 1956, in which the speakers communally incited the Muslims present. As a result of communal bitterness created among the Muslims elaborate law and order arrangements had to be made to prevent breaches of the peace in the city. (g) That on the night between the 7th and 8th September, 1956, you held a secret meeting in your house in Kanpur in which you appointed some persons to carry out communal agitation in the following districts of the State : 1. Lucknow 2. Varanasi 3. Azamgarh and Mau 4. Aligarh 5. Ghazipur 6. Gorakhpur 7. Agra 8. Balrampur (Gonda) 9. Allahabad 10. Faizabad 11. Jaunpur 12. Farrukhabad 13. Barabanki 14. Bareilly 15. Basti 16. Unnao. You exhorted those present in this meeting that agitation should continue until the Government took action against publication of the book and the Governor was dismissed. You said that volunteers should be enlisted for offering Satyagraha and taking resort to hunger strike in front of Council House and Government House, Lucknow. Consequently Sri Wazarat Shikoh resorted to hunger strike at the council House on 10th September, 1956 and was arrested. In another secret meeting held at your house on the night between the 8th and 9th September, 1956 you told those present that section 144 Cr. P. C., should be defied in the city. You condemned the counter agitation launched by the Hindus. You also asserted that the major community that is the Hindus, was carrying on counter agitation with the connivance of the Government. You also suggested that workers should be sent to those districts in which there was no agitation. (h) That on the 16th September 1956 at Kanpur, you suggested to your co-workers that the Muslim fire-arms licence holders should be told that they should use their firearms in cases there was need to do so. You told them that the Hindus were carrying on counter-agitation at the instigation of the Government and should be taught a lesson. In mohalla Bansmandi, Kanpur, on the same date, you told your workers that under the Congress regime the interests of the Muslims were at stake. It was high time to remove the Government. The Muslims should be told to repeat the history of Karbala at this juncture. In mohalla Fahimabad, Kanpur you instigated the Muslims to launch jehad against the Government. It is that you were determined to create communal frenzy and hatred against the Hindus on the 16th September 1956 and advocated violence against them. When in the evening of the 16th September 1956, at about 8 p.m. some of your co-workers informed you about the proceedings of the meetings held by the Hindu Maha Sabha at Arya Samaj Hall, Kanpur, on the same evening and told you that slogan of Ishaq Ilmi Murdabad was shouted and the Holy Quran was dishonoured you told your colleagues that time had come to take severe action against the Hindus. You exhorted them to run to their mohallas and alert the Muslims to be prepared for all eventualities. You and a number of your followers came out in communal excitement armed with lathis and dandas on the public road in front of your office deliberately violating orders under section 144 Cr. P. C., which were in force in the city. The police reached the spot at the nick of time. You and your followers offered resistance to the police during arrest and caused injuries to some police officers and also attempted to seize the revolver of a sub-inspector of police. Eventually the police over-powered you and others by application of force and arrested you and some of your followers. Some made good their escape. It is evident that you were bent upon creating communal riot in the city on that night and if you and your followers had not been arrested there was every likelihood that Kanpur would have been in throes of a serious communal trouble.
(3.) THAT you have been a fanatical communalist and as a result of your rabidly communal activities to agitate and excite Muslims in the past the following action had to be taken against you : (a) That you were arrested in Kanpur on the 29th March 1950, under section 151 Cr. P. C., for communal activities and released after two months. (b) That you were arrested on 2nd May 1951, under section 151 Cr. P. C., for publishing an objectionable headline in your paper Siyasat, dated 1st May 1951, regarding rumours of killing of children by Kanpur refugees and sale of their cooked flesh at Kanpur Hotel owned by the refugees. (c) That in August 1951 you propagated cow slaughter in the open and had to be arrested under section 107/117 Cr. P. C. (d) That you were arrested on the 12th August 1952 in connection with Amrit Patrika agitation and detained under the Preventive Detention Act. You were released on 20-8-1953. (e) That you were arrested on the 29th January 1954, under section 107/117 Cr. P. C., by Sisamau police in Kanpur for communal activities and sent to Aligarh to stand your trial under Section 124A, I. P. C. You were released after the trial in January 1955 and resumed your communal activities again." ;