SARJU PANDEY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus by one Sarju Pandey, a detenu in the District Jail at Lucknow, against the order of the District Magistrate of Ghazipur, dated 14-5-1955, passed under Section 3(1)(a)(ii), Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The order purported to have been passed with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

(2.) The petitioner is a member of the Provincial Committee of the U. P. Communist Party and Vice-President of the U. P. Kishan Sabha. He was arrested on the same day on which the detention order was passed and on 16-5-1955 he was supplied with the grounds of detention. He was accused of having delivered a number of speeches between 29-12-1954 and 13-5-1955 inciting people to violence, and the District Magistrate therefore felt satisfied that it was necessary to make the detention order with a view to 'preventing the petition from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State and the maintenance of public order. The gist of these speeches, or extracts therefrom, were given in the grounds, and instances of resultant acts of violence were cited.

(3.) The petitioner made a representation, against the detention order to the State Government, and the latter placed the grounds for the detention and the petitioner's representation against it before the Advisory Board. The Board, after hearing the petitioner, submitted its report on 19-7-1955 that there was in its opinion sufficient cause for the detention of the petitioner whereupon the detention order was confirmed by the Government. The report of the Advisory Board was communicated to the District Magistrate of Ghazipur by the Government by means of a letter dated 11-8-1955 from Lucknow. This letter reached the District Magistrate of Ghazipur on 16-8-1955, and on the same date the District Magistrate issued a letter addressed to the Superintendent, Sitapur Jail, where the detenu was then supposed to be detained, informing him of the decision of the Advisory Board. It appears, however, that meanwhile the detenu had been transferred to the Lucknow Jail. The aforesaid letter of the District Magistrate was therefore redirected to the Lucknow Jail and communicated there to the petitioner on 27-8-1955. On 26-9-1955 the present petition was filed. The petition is supported by the petitioner's affidavit. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State by Rana Jai Singh, Sub-Inspector District Intelligence Staff Ghazipur, he being the officer who had submitted reports of the speeches delivered in various meetings by the petitioner. The following points have been raised by the petitioner, who argued the case personally before us.