M RAVICHANDRAN AND Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of three Habeas Corpus Petitions, they being H.C.P. Nos. 1495, 1496 and 1497 of 1999, H.C.P. No. 1495 of 1999 has been filed to challenge the order of detention passed, on 30-4-1999, by the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, in respect of one Zahir Hussain @ Scientist. The order is passed under the provisions of Section 3(2) of the National Security Act with a view to prevent the said Zahir Hussain @ Scientist from acting prejudicial to the public order. H.C.P. No. 1496 of 1999 is in respect of one Sheik Mohideen and the order has been passed on the same day and by the same authority, i.e. the Commissioner of Police, Chennai. H.C.P. No. 1497 of 1999 is in respect of one Mohammed Kamil, in whose case also the order of detention has been passed by the same authority on the same date. Since the facts pertaining to all the three detenus are common and since the learned counsel has also chosen to address common arguments, we are disposing of the three petitions by this common judgment.

(2.) In support of the order, in the grounds it is commonly stated that on or about 14-2-1998, there were series of bomb blasts at Coimbatore, where Mr. L. K. Advani, the then President of Bharthiya Janta Party, was to address a public meeting and that in that bomb blasts, several persons lost their lives and several others were injured grievously and that the investigation revealed that the Muslim hard-core fundamentalists, with the active assistance of an organisation called "UL UMMA", were responsible for the bomb blasts. It was suggested that the said organisation was also encouraging and aiding its followers to promote hatred, disharmony and enmity on the religious grounds in between Hindu and Muslim communities and that the said organisation had done several acts of criminal nature, including murders, causing injuries, etc. out of ill-will that felt against the Hindu community. It is then pointed out that in respect of this incident extensive investigation was taken up in the other parts of Tamil Nadu and more particularly in major cities like Chennai, Madurai, etc. It is pointed out that the said organisation is declared as an unlawful organisation under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, by G.O. dated 14-2-1998. It is then pointed out that number of sympathizers of "UL UMMA" and its active members were arrested and large quantity of explosives were seized from them. Thereafter, three incidents have been relied upon, they being dated 30-5-1999 and 31-5-1999. The first among them is a bomb blast, which took place near a hostel compound, within the jurisdiction of D-1 Triplicane Police Station. It is suggested that Crime No. 695 of 1999 was registered for offences under Section 3 of the Explosives Substances Act and Section 436, IPC and taken up for investigation. It is then suggested that on the same day, a Police Constable called Natarajan lodged a complaint in F-2 Egmore Police Station, Chennai about planting of bombs near the telephone box junction kept in front of the Office of the Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai. It is stated that Crime No. 1018 of 1999, under Sections 286, 307, IPC and Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosives Substances Act, 1980 was registered thereupon. It is then stated that on 31-5-1999, one Dayalan lodged a complaint about a live bomb having been kept at the backyard of a building situated at Anna Salai. That case was registered as Crime No. 1253 of 1999 foroffences under Sections 286 and 307, IPC and Section 4 of the Explosives Substances Act in F-1 Chintadripet Police Station. It is then pointed out that such live bombs were planted at the big cities like Trichy and Coimbatore also and were recovered on the same day. The narration of the grounds further suggested that because of all these, the investigation of the cases of these nature was transferred to CB-CID and more particularly to Thiru R. Sushilkumar, Inspector of Police, Crime Branch, C.I.D., Metro Chennai. It is then pointed out that one Sadakkathullah was arrested by the Inspector of Police, Crime Branch, C.I.D., Madurai, on 5-6-1999, in Crime No. 1163 of 1999, registered by B-1, Bazar Police Station, Coimbatore and on his interrogation, he confessed that some important "UL UMMA" activists had visited his house and he has also further stated that out of them one Jahir Hussain of Coimbatore (not the concerned detenu) and Moosa came to his house with two bags containing six boxes full of bombs and ten numbers of pipe bombs and there were some activists like Sulthan, Ummar Farook, Ammani and Kalleel, who had joined them in the house. From this statement, it was also apparent that said Jahir Hussain had sent one Sulthan with a bomb in a bag to Trichy. The confession also revealed that the bombs were meant for planting in Chennai and that they were going to meet one Kamil of Jihad Committee. It is then pointed out that the three cases, dated 30-5-1999 and 31-5-1999, were connected with the bombs only and, therefore, it was felt from the statement of Sadakkathullah that there could be a possibility of the other members of the "AL UMMA" meeting Kamil in Chennai for the purposes of planting bombs. It is then pointed out that Mohammed Kamil and Jahir Hussain were arrested on 9-6-1999 in front of Central Railway Station, when they were about to leave for Bombay. They were also interrogated and they gave their confessions and, in pursuance of the same, copies of the pamphlets in the room of Mohammed Kamil and the motorcycle, which they used for transporting and planting the bombs hidden at Avalia Sahib Street, were also seized. It was apparent from the said confessions that it was Mohammed Kamil, who has masterminded the explosion of bombs in Chennai along with Jahir Hussain @ Scientist and some others. The grounds further suggest that it was apparent during interrogation that "AL UMMA" activists were not at all happy with the action taken against them by the police and the Government and they had planned to plant bombs in major cities to cause damage to the buildings of police and prison authorities and to cause threat to the prison, police and Government authorities. The grounds also suggest about the activities of Jahir Hussain and his having hatched a criminal conspiracy to plant live bombs in major cities in Tamil Nadu to struck terror and panic in the minds of Police, Prison and Government authorities and thus to disturb the public peace. The grounds separately suggest that the concerned detenus were on remand and a further satisfaction is recorded in the grounds that the detention of the said three detenus was essential for maintaining the public order as their activities were prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Of course, in the three cases, similar satisfaction is recorded against each of the detenu.

(3.) Learned counsel Mr. Xavier Felix, first urged that all the three orders have been passed without application of mind and are pure result of non-application of mind. He also points out that some important documents were suppressed by the sponsoring authority and were not put before the detaining authority, which has resulted in the whole exercise being rendered illegal. He also argues further that the detaining authority was not in possession of the necessary documents and has acted without considering some very material facts. He also suggested that the representations which were sent by the detenus to the Central Government has been perfunctorily dealt with with unhealthy haste and that there is no real consideration of the representations sent by the detenus on the part of the Central Government. He also points out that though some documents were sought for by the detenus, they were not supplied. He further points out that the basis of the detention was the statement, in the nature of confession, given by Sadakkathullah and, in fact, Sadakkathullah himself had been released and his detention had been revoked later on and that factor should be taken into consideration by the State Government. He also points out that the apprehension by the detaining authority that the detenus were likely to be bailed out was a mere ipse dixit and there could not be any real satisfactionon the part of the detaining authority. He also pointed out that some documents were supplied to the detenus on 3-8-1999, which documents had no relevance whatsoever and as such had resulted in confusing the detenus so as to affect their rights of making effective representation.