LOK ADHIKAR SANGH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these petitions the petitioner is Lok Adhikar Sangh - a civil liberty organisation - which, as stated in the petitions is committed to the protection of civil liberties and democratic rights of the poor and deprived sections of the people in the State of Gujarat. In Special Criminal Application No. 217 of 1992 the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of order of detention dated 9/01/1992 against Shri Shyambhai Urfe Irfanbhai Asgarali Engineer (Vohra) (detenu); while in Special Criminal Application No. 228 of 1992 the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of order of detention dated 9/01/1992 passed against Shri Virsinghbhai Vishrambhai Patel. Since both these petitions involve common question of law and facts, both of them are being heard together and are being decided together by this common judgment and order.

(2.) Both the detenus have been preventively detained by order dated 9/01/1992 passed by the District Magistrate, Dangs, Ahwa. The orders of detention have been passed under the provisions of sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 3 of the National Security Act. 1980. The detenus have been detained pursuant to the order of detention on the same day. The detenu in Special Criminal Application No. 217 of 1992 has been committed to Central Prison, Vadodara, while detenu in Special Criminal Application No. 228 of 1992, namely, Shri Virsinghbhai Vishrambhai Patel has been ordered to be committed to Central Prison, Bhuj. The grounds of detention in respect of both the detenus are dated 13/01/1992. Detenu Shri Shyambhai Urfe Irfanbhai Asgarali has been served with the grounds of detention of 13/01/1992, while detenu Shri Virsinghbhai Vishrambhai Patel has been served with the grounds of detention on 14/01/1992. The grounds of detention in both the cases are almost identical.

(3.) It is stated in the grounds of detention that the area of activities of the detenu were following villages and the forest area round about these villages: 1. Koshimada 2. Dardi 3. Savarkhadi 4. Godadiya 5. Patali 6. Dabdar 7. Chikar (Talav Faliya) 8. Ghoghalpada 9. Dhudhuniya 10. Ghodi 11. Dhadhra It is alleged in the grounds of detention that the tribals residing in the aforesaid villages were being incited by the detenu against the officers of the Forest Department and Police Department; that the tribals were being told that if the officers of the Forest Department and Police Department obstructed them from cultivating forest land they should violently assault the officers, beat them and see that the officers run away. It is further alleged that for achieving the aforesaid object the detenu had formed 'Bhoomiheen Kisan Hakk Samraksha Samiti (Committee for the protection of rights of landless farmers). It is also alleged that the detenu was persuading the tribals to become members of the said committee. The tribals were being told that whosoever becomes member of the committee would get five acres of forest land for cultivation. The tribals were told that this object would be achieved by the detenus. It is further alleged that as per the provisions of Art. 51A(g) of the Constitution of India it is a fundamental duty of citizens to protect and improve the natural environment including forests. However, the detenu was acting contrary to the aforesaid constitutional provision as regards fundamental duty; that the detenu threatened the officers and employees, intimidated them and even beat them. 3A. Thus as per the allegations the detenu had created an atmosphere so as to adversely affect the maintenance of public order in the area of Dangs District. It is also alleged that the forests of Dangs were declared as protected forests under the provisions of the Indian Forests (Conservation) Act, 1980, that if any land is to be exempted from the provisions of the said Act, necessary permission of the Central Government was required to be taken. Despite this provision, the detenu was acting contrary to the provisions of the Indian Forests (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the tribals were being misled; that the tribals were being induced to become members of the committee by giving false hopes; that by collecting fees from tribals they were bring falsely incited on the promise that land will be secured for them by giving fight to the Government. It was alleged that the detenu was carrying on this activity by giving false promise and thereby inciting the tribals. Details of about fifteen criminal cases have been mentioned in the grounds of detention. Only one of these cases is pending in the Court and rest of the cases are under police investigation.