SANLUT LETKHOHAO Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who has been detained by order dated 31.1.2014 under sub section 3 of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980, has filed this writ application challenging the said order of detention.

(2.) FROM the grounds of detention, it appears that the petitioner joined an armed gang namely, Pakan Re -unification Army (PRA in short) in the month of August, 2011 and got involved in several criminal activities such as kidnapping for ransom. On 24.1.2014 he was arrested by a team of Sekmai P.S. in connection with FIR No. 13(1)14 registered u/s. 365/34 IPC & 25(1 -C) Arms Act. One Mobile hand -set with sim card and one driving licence were seized from his possession. While he was in custody in the aforesaid case, the impugned order of detention was passed on 31.1.2014 by the District Magistrate, Imphal West. The District Magistrate, while passing the order, recorded his subjective satisfaction in the following manner:

(3.) MS . Manomala, learned State counsel referring to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State, submitted that even if no bail application is moved by the petitioner for being released on bail, if the District Magistrate on the basis of the documents placed before him was satisfied that an order of detention should be passed, no illegality could be found with such order. So far as delay in disposal of the representation is concerned, it was contended by Ms. Manomala, learned State counsel that the delay has been explained in the counter affidavit and the petitioner cannot take advantage of delay which has been explained.