ROSHAN RHI ALIAS ROSU Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioner/detenu and Mrs. Longkumar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents No. 1 and 2 and Mr. T. B. Jamir, learned C.G.C. for the respondent No. 3.

(2.) THE petitioner was arrested on 11.05.11 in connection with Dimapur East PS Case No. 00125/11 under Section 364//361 (A) IPC read with Section 7 of the NSR Act. THE S.P., Dimapur, proposed to the District Magistrate, Dimapur on 07.05.11 for detention of the petitioner under Section 3(1) (2) of the National Security Act., 1980 (for short the Act). Accordingly, the District Magistrate, Dimapur passed the preventive detention order dated 19.05.2011. THEreafter the Respondent No. 2, District Magistrate, sent communication to the Government requesting to the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of Nagaland for approval of the detention order. Accordingly, the detention order was approved by the Special Secretary to the Government of Nagaland (Home Department) vide order dated 26.05.11.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the detaining authority, Respondent No. 2, has not filed any affidavit in response to the notice issued by the Court to testify that the impugned detention order was passed by him after careful perusal of the materials placed before him and on being satisfied himself that issuance of detention order was warranted. A comprehensive affidavit was filed by the Special Secretary to the Government of Nagaland (Home Depart-ment) on behalf of the State respondents who has no personal knowlegde or had had any occasion to examine the materials placed before the Respondent No. 2 before issuing the impugned order. This, according to Mr. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioner, is contrary to the procedure laid down in the Act as well as the judicial pronouncements of the Apex Court as well as this Court. In support of his submission he refers to the decisions of this Court in Ringkahao Horam, Mrs. Piskim Shimray & Ms. Rose Singme Vs. State of Nagaland, reported in 1997 (II) GLT 419 and Phukan Daimary @ Fungja-rang Vs. State of Assam & Ors., reported in 1998(4) GLT 40.