BHAGWAT DAYAL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Bhagwat Dayal was detained in pursuance of an order passed by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad u/ S. 3(1) of the National Security Act. By the present petition the petitioner has challenged the validity of his detention in pursuance of the said order.

(2.) Briefly stated the ground of detention served upon the petitioner is as follows: That on 3-7-1990 one Risal Singh lodged a police report at Model Police Station Link Road, Ghaziabad that on 2-7-1990 his son Rajendra had gone to supply milk in the evening. Near the railway line some unknown persons kidnapped him. On the night between 8th and 9/07/1990 on information furnished by an Informer Station Officer, Police Station Link Road Sri Suresh Singh Chauhan along with other persons was checking the vehicles at Chhagjarasi bend when a maruti car bearing No. DBA 1106 arrived from the city side. When an effort was made to stop the car for checking, the car was slowed down and turned onwards Kanawani. After proceeding for 30-40 paces persons sitting in the car tried to run away after alighting from it but were intercepted by the police party. On the search of the car the kidnapped person Rajendra was found in the dicky of the car with his eyes, hands and feet tied by cloth. From possession of the petitioner one country made poistol of 315 bore was recovered. On account of this heinous kidnapping incident there was a great panic in the surroundings and the public order was disturbed. This incident had been registered as crime No. 124 of 1990 Police Station, Link Road, u/ S. 364, Penal Code. After the said incident a great panic, terror and fear prevailed in the city and district of Ghaziabad, as many dignified persons and industrialists visualising the seriousness of the abovementioned incident decided to leave Ghaziabad as similar type of incidents had been reported in few papers having national circulation, whose cuttings were also appended along with the grounds. As the panic on account of the said incident was still prevailing amongst the masses and as on the detenu being released the public order could again be disturbed and as the detenu had moved a bail application in the Court of Session Judge, Ghaziabad in which 30/07/1990 was fixed as the date for hearing of bail matter the detaining authority was satisfied that with a view to prevent the petitioner to act in a manner which may affect the maintennce of public order it was necessary to pass an order of detention against him.

(3.) The points raised for challenging the detention of the petitioner in this petition are that the police report does not connect the petitioner with the activity of abduction hence the ground of detention has no nexus so far as the petitioner's detention is concerned. The next point taken in this petition is that the solitary incident on the basis of which the detention order has been passed cannot disclose a tendency on the part of the petitioner to act similarly in future. Thirdly it is contended that the activity mentioned in the ground of detention does not affect the even tempo of life of the community, hence is not related to the question of maintenance of public order. Fourth point argued is that there was no material in support of the ground of detention and as such the satisfaction of the detaining authority was vitiated. In the same connection it is also being argued that the police report alone could not constitute sufficient material for detaining the petitioner and fifthly the petitioner alleges that the detaining authority was wrongly influenced by irrelevant material viz. the reports published in the newspapers.