(1.) These two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution by Subhash Singh (petitioner in Writ Petition No, 11798 of 1983) and Naresh Kumar (petitioner in (Writ petition No. 11799 of 1983) are respectively directed against orders dated 17th of August, 1983 and 25th of August, 1983 passed by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad, authorising their detention under Section 3 of the National Security Act. (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) The reasons communicated to the two petitioners ill writing indicate that the satisfaction of the District Magistrate that it was necessary to detain them with a view to prevent them from acting in a manner prejudicial to maintenance of public order, was based on following facts:
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners questioned the validity of their detention on the ground that out of the three grounds on which the orders for petitionersT detention were based, two of them, namely, the first two were such which merely had an impact on the question of law and order and had no bearing on the question of maintenance of public order. Relying upon a long string of decisions of the Supreme Court, he urged that inasmuch as the orders authorising petitioners detention were based amongst others on irrelevant grounds as well, those orders stood vitiated and the two petitioners are entitled to be released from custody forthwith. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioners also emphasised that according to various decisions of the Supreme Court, the general rule is that in cases where the order of detention is based on a number of grounds, each such ground must be such which results into a prejudicial activity of the nature specified in section 3 of the Act and even if one- of such grounds is found to be Such which has no such effect, the entire order of detention would stand vitiated. According to him the exceptions to the aforementioned general rule, where t he grounds on which the order of detention is based can be read in conjunction with each other, are: