BABULAL MULCHAND Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE RAISEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Petition No. 1054 of 1974 Pokhardas v. The District Magistrate, Raisen and another. These are petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus. The petitions raise a common question and therefore, they are disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THE petitioners have been detained by separate orders of detention of the District Magistrate, Raisen, dated 29-10-1974, made in exercise of the powers conferred on her under section 3 (1) (a) (iii) of the Maintenance of internal Security Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act", on her being satisfied that their detention was necessary with a view to preventing them from "acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies essential to the community".

(3.) THERE is no suggestion that the provisions of the Act have not been complied with. Nor is there any suggestion that the petitioners were deprived of their right of making representations under section 8 (1) of the Act. The district Magistrate forthwith reported the fact of the making of the detention orders to the State Government, and the detention of the petitioners was approved or by the State Government under sub-section (3) of section 3 of the act. The petitioners submitted their representations on 14 11-1974 to the state Government. The representations submitted by them under section 8 (1)of the Act were duly considered by the State Government and rejected. The state Government sent a communication to each of the petitioners to the effect that after full consideration it did not find any reason to cancel his detention order. The cases of the petitioners were placed before the Advisory Board under section 10 of the Act, along with the detention orders together with the grounds of their detention and all other particulars bearing on the same, as well as the representations of the petitioners. On 5-12-1974, the Advisory Board, after considering the materials placed before it and the representations of the petitioners, and after giving to them a personal hearing, made a report to the state Government to the effect that there was sufficient cause for their detention. The State Government accordingly in exercise of its powers under subsection (1) of section 12 of the Act, confirmed the orders of detention.