SAJID Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS habeas corpus writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quash ing the detention order dated 28.5.2008 passed by respondent No. 3 against the petitioner under section 3 (2) of the Na tional Security Act and for his release from detention under the above Act. We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and Sri B.P. Mishra, learned Advocate for Un ion of India.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in this case co-accused Nafees, who was detained under the Na tional Security Act in respect of the same incident which has been alleged against the petitioner, has been released and the de tention order passed against him has been revoked on 1.9.2008. He submitted that the allegation against the petitioner and Nafees was the same and so after allowing benefit of the above order of revocation, the peti tioner should also be released on the ground of parity, revoking the detention order passed against him.

(3.) WE do not agree with the above contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. There is no limitation period for submitting a representation against the detention under the National Security Act, and even if the petitioner had not submitted his representation at the earlier stage, he may now submit his representation to the concerned authorities and may take a plea in that representation that the co- accused Nafees who had been detained under the National Security Act, has now been released in accordance with the order dated 1.9.2008, and so benefit of that order should be given to him also. But the pres ent habeas corpus writ petition is not maintainable when the petitioner has got the alternative remedy of submitting his representation to the concerned authorities.