RAJU Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MATHURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) U. S. Tripathi, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing his detention order dated 12-7-2002, passed by District Magistrate, Mathura, respondent No. 1, under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act.

(2.) THE petitioner was served with the grounds of detention along with the order of detention, which stated that on 28-4-2002 at about 3. 30 p. m. the petitioner along with his associates Jamuna, Kanja and Jatwar armed with fire arms came to the grocery shop of Pachan Kumar Agrawal, situated at Mohalla Hathi Darwaza Bazar, Goverdhan for realizing Chowth. THE petitioner and his associates abused and said Pachan Kumar Agrawal for refusal to pay Rs. 500 as Chowth and caused injuries to them. He also exhorted his associates Jamuna and Kanja to kill and fire on Govind Prasad. Govind Prasad was seriously injured and fell down. Complainant, Pachan Kumar, his father Lakkhi Lal and other customers were also injured. THE petitioner and his associates threw away the articles stored in the shop of complainant. THE incident took place in a busy market situate at Parikrama Marg and a sense of fear and terror was created. Shopkeepers left their shop and started running helter skelter. THE pilgrims performing Parikrama of Goverdhan Parvat were also affected and they started running helter and skelter in the mid of Parikrama. On account of dare devil act of the petitioner and his associates, a sense of fear and terror was created in Kasba Goverdhan and shopkeepers were forced to pay chowth to him. On previous occasions also the petitioner and his associates had terrorized the complainant and his family members regarding realization of chowth. During treatment of his injuries Govind Prasad died. On the report of the incident a case at crime No. 216 under Sections 384, 307, 323 and 504 IPC was registered at P. S. Goverdhan, which was altered under Section 302/34 IPC after the death of Govind Prasad.

(3.) WE have heard Shri S. K. Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 4, Union of India and have perused the record.