NAUSHEY Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JALAUN AT ORAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the impugned detention order dated 14 -7 -2001 Annexure -1 to the petition passed under the National Security Act. The grounds of detention are in Annexure -2 to the petition. It is stated therein that there are several serious cases against the petitioner. On 8 -2 - 2001 it is alleged that the petitioner and his associates came to the shop of one Brij Kishore Gupta and demanded Rs. 5,000 from him and when he refused to pay he was shot dead. This created panic in the bazar and the shopkeepers closed their shops and there was a panic in the locality. On 6 -3 -2001 the petitioner and his associates demanded money from one Devi Deen and when that was refused he was beaten and a criminal case has been registered in this connection. On 28 -1 -2001 the petitioner and his associates shot at one Dharmendra Agarwal. On 8 -8 -2000 the petitioner and his associates fired at the police party and the police recovered a pistol and cartridges on 22 -9 -1999. The petitioner threatened to kill one witness in a case against him. On 13 -7 -1998 the petitioner and his associates forcibly abducted a Police Constable Santosh Kumar infront of the jail gate at the point of pistol. On 30 -5 -1998 the petitioner threatened a witness Manoj Gudholia and a case was registered in this connection. On 3 -5 - 1979 the petitioner and his associates shot dead one Gulley and a case under Section 302 IPC was registered. On 11 -7 -1996 the petitioner's wife filed an application under Section 498/506, IPC against him.

(2.) IT is alleged that petitioner was trying to obtain bail. It is also alleged that he realizes Goonda tax hence the District Magistrate was satisfied that the activities of the petitioner are pre -judicial to public order and we agree with the learned Government Counsel that the petitioner's activities has vitiated public order and not merely law and order. Hence the detention order in our opinion is valid. Learned Counsel for the petitioner then submitted that petitioners, bail application was rejected before the impugned detention order ws passed and hence the detention order was illegal. In 'Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 38005 of 2001, Karesh Pal @ Billu v. District Magistrate, decided on 25 -1 -2002, since reported in 2002(1) JIC 514 (All), we have discussed this aspect of the matter and have held that even if a person is in Jail a detention order can be passed. We have relied on the Supreme Court decision in Ahmad Nassar v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2000 (1) JIC (SC) 221, for the proposition that a valid detention can be passed even when the detenue has not applied for bail.

(3.) ON the fact of the case we find no illegality in the impugned detention order. The petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.