IMRAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(ALL)-2018-2-52
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on February 19,2018

IMRAN Appellant
VERSUS
Union of India and 3 Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

J.J.MUNIR, J. - (1.) The petitioner Imran has been detained by an order dated 28.05.2017 passed under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. This order has been passed by the District Magistrate, Deoria on ground that it is necessary to detain the petitioner in order to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The aforesaid order is annexed as Annexure no. 7 to the petition and is hereinafter referred to as 'Detention Order'. The Detention Order is supported by grounds of detention annexed as Annexure no. 8 to the petition that furnish details of those facts, circumstances and evidence that have been taken into consideration by the District Magistrate, Deoria to form his subjective satisfaction required under the statute. The grounds also undertake and inform of the detenue of all his rights to represent against the Detention Order including the authorities to whom he could represent, the time within which he could do so and the provisions of the National Security Act , 1980, for short the Act, which entitle the detenu to represent. The grounds of detention in support the detention order are also dated 28.05.2017 and have been duly served upon the petitioner along with the report of the sponsoring authority (the police) as also other documents that have been taken into consideration by the District Magistrate, Deoria who is hereinafter referred to as the 'Detaining Authority'.
(2.) The petitioner has laid challenge to his detention pursuant to the Detention Order through the instant habeas corpus writ petition that was filed on 10.08.2017. The writ petition came up for admission on 16.08.2017 when the learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to file a supplementary affidavit. The following order was passed by this Court on that day: "Mr. Gyan Prakash Asthana, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no. 1- Union of India. As prayed by Mr. Nazrul Islam Jafri, learned counsel for the petitioner, list the matter in the next cause list to enable him to file supplementary affidavit."
(3.) A supplementary affidavit sworn on 17.08.2017 by one Abdul Rahman Khan was filed in the office regarding which an office report dated 22.08.2017 was recorded. The petition came up for admission on 23.08.2017 along with supplementary affidavit when the following order was made: "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the opposite parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed supplementary affidavit today which is taken on record. In paragraph 6 of the supplementary affidavit, it has been stated as follows:- "6. That under Secretary Home (Confidential Department Government of U.P. had sent a radiogram/ crash to the Superintendent District Jail Deoria and District Magistrate Deoria, on 19.07.2017 thereby informing them about the report of the advisory board having confirmed the detention order passed against the petitioner by the District Magistrate Deoria dated 28.05.2017 and further the State Government had also confirmed the said detention order passed against the petitioner u/s 12(1) of the National Security Act. Photocopy of the radiogram dated 19.07.2017 issued by the under Secretary Home (Confidential) Department Government of U.P. is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No.S.A.1 to this affidavit." Respondents are granted six weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed withintwo weeks thereafter. List thereafter." ;


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