LAWS(ALL)-1948-9-3

DURGADAS Vs. REX

Decided On September 15, 1948
DURGADAS Appellant
V/S
REX Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are applications under B. 491, Criminal P. G for the release of the applicants who were detained under the United Provinces Maintenance of Public Order (Temporary) Act, 1947 (U. P. Act (IV [4] of 1947). These cases came before my learned brothers, Raghubar Dayal and Wanchoo, who thought it proper to refer certain points for decision by a larger Bench in view of the fact that the points were of general importance. In his referring order brother Raghubar Dayal has said: The grounds furnished to the various detenu applicants raise questions of fall or substantial compliance with the provisions of Section 5 of the aforesaid Act... they can be grouped for purposes of determining the question of compliance of S. S of the Act in general terms....I would include in one group the "Applications of Shiv Dutt...and others where the grounds give some details and do refer to the personal conduct of the detenu proceeded against, The grounds may not be full and complete. In the other group I would include the applications of Girraj Kishore and...others ... In these cases the grounds are mentioned in much less detail and it is also possible to argue whether on the basis of those grounds one can reasonably come to the conclusion that the detenu was expected to act in any of the prejudicial manners mentioned in Section 3 of the Act, This would raise the question whether it is open to the Court to enter into the question whether the District Magistrate could have been reasonably satisfied on the basis of the material before him. After having made these observations he formulated the points for reference to the Pull Bench.

(2.) The first point on which he wanted an authoritative decision is the requirement of Section 5 of the Act in the abstract, if possible, and with reference to the grounds furnished: In the cases referred to by him in particular, and also on the question whether it is open to this Court to question the satisfaction of the District Magistrate contemplated in Section 3 of the Act with respect to its being arrived at reasonably or otherwise.

(3.) In the cases that were referred by my brother, Wanchoo, he formulated three questions for answer;