IQBAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the Court.-In the instant writ petition the sole petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order of the District Magistrate, Mordabad dated 1-5-2004 detaining him under the provisions contained in Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short the Act ).

(2.) COUNTER and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and are on record.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the alleged incident had taken place on 21-1-2004 whereas the impugned order of detention was passed on 1-5-2004 after long lapse of time but without there being any justification for passing the order after such delay. It is further submitted that no explanation has been furnished in the counter-affidavit for passing the impugned order after lapse of more than three months. Reliance has also been placed on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Waseem v. State of U. P. & Ors. , reported in 2004 (50) ACC 931. It is also contended that there was no material before the detaining authority at the time of passing of the impugned order that there was every possibility of the petitioner being released on bail and on being released he will indulge in similar activities. It is also stated that Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 37238 of 2004 of co- detenu Saleem v. State of U. P. & Ors. , has been allowed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 16- 12-2004.