SUDHAMAY BASU, J. - (1.) THIS Rule relates to an order dated 7th of Mav. 1974 passed bv the District Magistrate, 24 -pafr -ganas in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under Sub -section (1) read with Sub -section (2) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. 1971 with a view to preventing the detenu from acting in a manner preiudicial to the maintenance of public order. The grounds served upon the detenu are two of which the first ground is as follows: -
(2.) ON 9 -3 -1974 at about 15.30 hrs. you alona with vour associates namelv 1. LaltuDas. 2. Sunil. 3. Rantu Singh and others demanded monev from Sudarsan Mukherii of Noapara. P. S. Barasat at Dut -' tapurkurhat. As Sri Sudarsan Mukher.ii refused to pay the money, you alonp with your associates seriously assaulted him and snatched awav his wrist watch. In consequence of vour such activity. thp public order in the locality was seriously disturbed, in that the people who assembled in the Hat for marketing, ran awav helter skelter and the shop keepers closed their shops immediately fearine that thav would be killed bv you and vouf associates. Witnesses are, however, afraid of deposing against vou fearing that if thev deposed, they would be killed bv vou and your associates'. Mr. D. P. Kundu, learned Advocate appearing in support of the Rule submitted that the first ground was irrelevant to the obiect of detention. According to him. the incident involved in the said ground constitutes an infraction of law and order and did not affect public order. Mr. P. R. Roy, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State, however, disputed the submissions made bv Mr. Kundu, and contended that the ground was germane and relevant to the -obiect of detention. According to him. the incident involved in the ground affected public order. Mr. Roy for this purpose relied on a recent decision of the Supreme Court in Writ Petition No. 476 of 1974 dated 22 -1 -1975 : (1975 Cri LJ 588) (SC).
(3.) AFTER careful considering the grounds and the aforesaid iudement and other relevant decisions of the Supreme Court we, however, find substance in the contention of Mr. Kundu.;