BALRAJ MUDHOK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In each of these nine criminal writ petititions (Nos. 2 to 10 of 1966) under Articles 22 and 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner therein prays that this court may be pleased to issue a writ of habeaus corpus calling upon the respondent to produce him in court and to show on what authority they have detained him and, if they fail to show lawful authority for doing so, to sat him at liberty.

(2.) The facts of these cases ire more or less identical. Common questions of law arise for decision in these petitions. Hence they are consolidated together. After the ugly incidents in Delhi on 7th of this month, the petitioners were arrested between the 7th and 13th of this month. They are now detained in prison. They allege that they were not informed why they were arrested, nor were they produced before any Magistrate. Their case is that they are unlawfully detained.

(3.) The case for the Respondent 1s that the petitioners were arrested under Section 107 read with Section 151 of the Code. Thereafter they were produced before one or the other of the Magistrates in Delhi, who had ordered them to be released on bail, but as they failed to give the security ordered, they had been ordered to be kept up in judicial custody. For giving relief to the petitioners in these petitions, it is necessary to find out which one of the two reasons is the correct version, as I am of the opinion that on the very facts pat forward by the respondents,it is clear the datention of the petitioners is not in accordance with law.