ABDUL GHANI HAMID Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ of Habeas Corpus for the immediate release of the petitioner who is now detained in the Hyderabad Central Jail, Chenchalguda.

(2.) THE petitioner is a Muhammadan and a Deendar by creed. He was detained once in 1935 and on the second occasion in 1945 in the North West Frontier Province for preaching Deendar Creed. He was also detained in the general round up immediately after the police action. There is no record of his subsequent activities. But, it appears that, after release, he left for Pakistan. He came back to India in October 1954 holding a category V Visa granted to him on 6-10-1956 on his Pakistan passport NO. 361398 by the Indian High Commissioner at Hyderabad (Sind ). On his application, the said visa was extended up to 20-12-1956. On 17-2-1956, he asked for further time till the end of June 1956, on the ground that his daughter was seriously ill. But, the Government of India refused to extend the time. Despite the refusal, he continued to stay in India. Since he came over here, the Commissioner says in his counter affidavit that he was addressing Friday gatherings at Khan-Quahe-Sarwar-E-Alam, Asif. nagar. On 23. 12. 1956, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by Section 3 (1) (a) (ii) and (2) of the Preventive Detention Act, the commissioner directed the petitioner to be detained. On 27-10-1956, a copy of the grounds of detention was served on the petitioner wherein it was stated as follows: He is a Deendar and a fanatic. He was detained twice in North West Frontier Province, once in 1935 and at another time in 1945 when he went there for preaching Deendar creed. He was also detained in the general round-up immediately after the police Action. Ever since his arrival in Hyderabad in October 1955, he has been indulging in objectionable communal activities and has been making irresponsible utterances at the Friday gathering in the Khan-Qhah-E-Sarwar-E-Alam, Asifnagar. At these meetings he indulged in criticising the Policy of the Government, which as an alien, he is not entitled to. His speeches are provocative and tinted with communalism, the central idea of which is briefly summarised below:

(3.) THE petitioner filed objections wherein he alleged that the grounds served on him were vague. He denied that he made any speeches wherein he made the statement attributed to him by the Commissioner. He also alleged that the detention order was mala fide and was intended only to harass him to leave India.