ODUT ALI MIAH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri G. S. Rama Rao, appearing as amicus curiae, has urged five grounds in support of his challenge to the validity of the order of detention passed on the petitioner by the District Magistrate, 24 parganas, under Section 3 (2) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (for short, the Act) read with subsection (1) thereof.

(2.) One point urged was that there was a delay of five months between the first incident relied upon in the grounds in support of the detention and the actual order of detention, but it is obvious that it was a course, of conduct attributed to the petitioner which persuaded the District Magistrate into the conclusion that it was necessary to inhibit his activities prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services to the community. The last of such instances was in April 1972 and within two months thereof the order of detention had been made. We are not impressed with the argument that there has been such a long gap between the materials on which reliance is placed and the actual order passed as to lead to the inference that the subjective satisfaction of the District Magistrate is unreal and invalid.

(3.) The second ground of attack is that the particulars furnished to the detenu are vague. There is no force in this either. The three episodes recited in the annexure to the detention order give sufficient particulars to enable an effective representation contra.