P L LAKHANPAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "Whereas the Central Government is satisfied that with a view to preventing Shri P. L.. Lakhanpal ....from acting in any manner prejudicial to the defence of India, and civil defence, public safety and the maintenance of public order, it is necessary that he should be detained."

(2.) In the present petition the petitioner challenges both the orders on the following grounds:-

(3.) Contentions 2, 4 and part of contention 5 in so far as they concern the original order of detention no longer survive as they were disposed of by the decision in W. P. 47 of 1966. The petitioner therefore cannot be permitted to reagitate the same questions, it not being his case that any new circumstances have arisen justifying their reagitation. Contention No. 3 also cannot be sustained because the affidavit clearly shows that the detention was ordered not only because of his writings in the said newspaper but that the said two orders were made after taking into consideration the over-all picture of his activities. Annexure D to the petition is the affidavit of B. S. Raghavan, Deputy Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs, filed in the previous petition. In that affidavit it was clearly stated that the activities of the petitioner "do conclusively prove that the petitioner is a pro-pakistani and anti-Indian"; that "there was material before the Union Home Minister about the prejudicial activities of the petitioner and he was satisfied that it was necessary to detain the petitioner" and that "it was the anti-national activities of the petitioner that was responsible for his detention." That affidavit also stated that