ANIL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner (in detention) before us has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing his detention order dated 20-9-1995, passed by the District Magistrate, Meerut under Section 3(2) National Security ACT.1980 The order of detention was served on the petitioner on 20-9-1995, when he was in Jail in case Crime No. 296/1995, under Sections 368/302/201, I.P.C., Police Station T.P.Nagar Meerrut. The detention order indicated that the District Magistrate. Meerut was satisfied that the detention of the petitioner was necessary with a view to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

(2.) The detention order of the petitioner emanated from his involvement in the commission of murder of a child Tushar aged about 4 years after hatching a criminal conspiracy with other co-accused in respect of which the aforesaid crime case was registered with the police station with the allegation that on 13-4-1995 at 12.00 noon. purusant to criminal conspiracy he kidnapped 4 years' old child Tushar son of Sanjay Singh, Supervisor Naveen Mandi, Meerut with the help of a Riksha Puller and after taking the child to a vacant house in the Avas Vikas Colony, same day he committed the Murder of the child with a knife in a most heinous manner by damaging, the eyes of the child and keeping hot brick on the body of the child. Petitioner allegedly confessed his guilt and narrated the sequence of murder of child and narrated his participation with his brother Sunil and father Nanak. He allegedly produced the blood stained knife from his possession during investigation of the case. It was further stated in the grounds of detention that on account of the act and conduct of the petitioner of killing the child in such a cruel manner a sense of fear and panic was created in the locality and children were not permitted to go to their schools. It is also indicated that the bail application of the petitioner was pending consideration before the Court and in order to avoid his further involvement in similar cases after his release on bail. which will affect public order. he was required to be detained under the National Security Act.

(3.) The case of detention against the petitioner was referred to the Advisory Board, before whom the petitioner appeared on 30-10-1995. The advisory Board recommended to the Government the detention of' The petitioner on 4-11-1995 and the State Government confirmed the detention order on 9-11-1995.