NAZIR AHMAD DAR Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) wanted us to consider this petition on merits. He has also moved CMPs for stay of execution of the order of detention against the detenues. Mr. S.T. Hussain argued the matter at some length and invited our attention to an authority of the Bombay High Court reported in Hiralal Soma Bhai Damania v. Dr. Gopal Singh and others1. The said authority is by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. As against this authority Mr. Kakroo relies on AIR 1987 Gujarat 253 and submitted that this court has relied on that authority in Ali Mohd. Wazir;s case.

(2.) Mr. Kakroo wants time to file detailed counter and to produce the record before the court. His submission so far as his right to file the counter is concerned, appears to be reasonable. In a writ of this nature, he is obliged to produce the record before us because it involves the question of liberty of an individual. Therefore, we directed him to produce the record pertaining to the detenues on the next date of hearing.

(3.) In view of the judgment given by us in Ali Mohd. Wazirs case in which we have held that detenu cannot be granted bail, but detention can be stayed in rarest of rare cases which we have illustrated in the said judgment. It will be appropriate that we decide this petition in Division Bench as we may have to consider Ali Mohd. Wazir's authority also which has a bearing on this case. Therefore the Deputy Registrar shall place this case before this bench as part heard because we have heard Mr. S.T. Hussain for about one hour. Mr. S.T. Hussain was fair enough to say that he has concluded his arguments in the belief that other side may not choose to file detailed counter. But the other side has now prayed for filing a detailed counter. Therefore, we have adjourned the case for an early date to be fixed by the Deputy Registrar. Two weeks time however, is granted to Mr. 1. (1988) 1 Crimes 857 (Bom.). Kakroo to do the needful and produce the record.