LAISHRAM SUSHIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR (MANIPUR)(DB)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject matter of challenge in the writ petition is the order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Imphal West on 3.3.2015 directing detention of the petitioner in exercise of the sub section 3 of Sec. 3 of the National Security Act, 1980.

(2.) In the grounds of detention, it is alleged that the petitioner had been appointed as Sub Inspector of Police in the Manipur Police Department in March, 2007 and after completion of training he was posted on field duty at different Police Stations. It is further alleged that during the first week of Aug., 2009 he contacted Lopen, a known smuggler and started carrying out smuggling of small arms. On 23.9.2009 he was arrested and some arms and ammunition's were recovered from him. He was also detained under the National Security Act, 1980 by order of the District Magistrate, Imphal West dated 28.9.2009. After being released, it is alleged that he became familiar with some members of the People's Liberation Army(in short PLA) and started working for the said organisation and consequently got involved in prejudicial activities affecting the security of the State. On 22.1.2014 he was again arrested and a case was registered vide FIR Case No. 21(1)2015 Imphal Police Station for commission of offence u/s 31(1) UA(P) Act and r/w Sec. 5 of the Official Secret Act. While in custody in connection with aforesaid case, the impugned order of detention was passed.

(3.) Mr. M. Munindro, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after being arrested on 22.1.2014 in connection with FIR No. 21(1)2015 Imphal Police Station, the petitioner had not moved any application for bail and in absence of any application for bail, the impugned order of detention could not have been passed solely on the ground that in the event of release the petitioner would again indulge in prejudicial activities. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner since the petitioner was already in custody and had not moved any application for bail, there was no reason whatsoever on the part of the District Magistrate to pass the order of detention under the National Security Act, 1980.