AMIT SINGH TOMAR Vs. STATE OF M.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition preferred under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 21st May, 2013 passed by the Deputy Secretary Home Department to the State of M.P. Bhopal, under Section 12 (1) of the National Security Act 1980, whereby the order passed by the District Magistrate Gwalior dated 25th March, 2013 has been made absolute.

(2.) THE prejudicial activities of the detenu as contained in the grounds of detention, in brief, are as under: On the report received from the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior and after consideration thereof with the materials furnished in support thereto, the District Magistrate passed an order of detention dated 25th March, 2013 against the petitioner after exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act 1980. The grounds for detention were contained in the order dated 25th March, 2013. The detenu then submitted his representation to the Advisory Board constituted under the National Security Act. On due consideration of the report submitted by the Advisory Board, the State Govt. passed an order dated 21st May, 2013 confirming the detention order dated 25th March, 2013 passed by the District Magistrate, as mentioned herein above.

(3.) IN the petition submitted before us, it is contended that the petitioner is a peaceful citizen, who is not involved in any kind of criminal activities, as alleged against him by the authorities. It is submitted that the basis for recording such detention order is registration of criminal cases as per the list submitted by the concerning S.P., but at present the petitioner is acquitted in almost cases and only two cases are pending against him. Photocopies of those judgments of acquittal have been placed on record. Learned counsel submitted that it is only thereafter that the Superintendent of Police Gwalior filed a report before the District Magistrate, Gwalior for taking appropriate action under the Act. The District Magistrate, Gwalior without making any inquiry into the report and without recording his satisfaction passed the order of detention. On submitting representation against the said order, the Advisory Board without affording a personal hearing to the petitioner passed the confirmation order. It is thus submitted that both the orders assailed herein are passed against Article 21 of the Constitution of India and hence same are liable to be quashed. In support of his submissions, learned counsel placed reliance on the law laid down by Hon. the Apex Court in the case of Vijay Kumar Vs. State of J., 1982 2 SCC 43 and of this court in the case of Chhenu Vs. State of M.P., 2011 2 MPLJ 587.