MD MONISUR ISLAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject matter of challenge in the present proceeding is the order dated 18.1.2002 passed by the District Magistrate, Dhubri under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) detaining the petitioner on the ground that is was so necessary to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public peace, order and tranquillity. The petitioner is since then detained in the District Jail, Dhubri.

(2.) We have heard Mr B.D. Konwar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr C. Choudhury, learned Central Govt. Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Mrs. A. Hazarika, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate, Assam for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4.

(3.) The facts as narrated in the writ petition can be summarised thus: The petitioner, a citizen of India, has been detained pursuant to the order of detention dated 18/1/2002 passed by the respondent No. 3 under Sec. 3(2) of the Act and the grounds of detention have been served on him. The order of detention and the grounds thereof have been annexed as Annexure-I and II respectively. The grounds of detention are vague and devoid of material particulars and the petitioner had not been supplied with relevant documents, basic facts and material particulars referred to and relied upon by the detaining authority while passing the order of detention. This has seriously prejudiced the petitioner and has denied him a proper opportunity of filing an effective representation against the order otf detention. He however on 29/1/2002 submitted a representation addressed to the appropriate authorities. He submitted another representation before the authorities on 10.2.2002 against the order otf detention. According to the petitioner, no report and/or document whatsoever having a bearing on the ground of detention and relied upon by the detaining authority, had been supplied to him. The grievance of the petitioner inter alia, is that the State Government did not consider and dispose of his representation dated 29.1.2002 expeditiously and that there had been inordinate delay in that regard. His said representation was disposed of by the State Government on 25.2.2002 and the order of rejection was communicated to him vide, Memo No. PLA.42/2002/88 dated 25/2/2002 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Political (A) Department. His further grievance is that the Central Government has also failed to discharge its statutory obligation to consider and dispose of his representation expeditiously as required under the law. The Central Government disposed of his representation dated 29.1.2002 only on 18.2.2002 and there is no explanation for such delay. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 18.1.2002 and his continued detention on the following grounds: