NAOROIBAM SANAJAOBA SINGH Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Th. Ranjit Singh, who submits that detenu, Mr.Naoroibam Sanajaoba Singh (36 years) S/o N. Chaoba Singh of Heingang Awang Leikai, A/P Chingmeirong Maning Leikai, P.S. Heingang, District Imphal East, was detained under the National Security Act, 1980 vide detention order dated 18th June,2012, which is at Annexure-A/1 page 10, and submits that the detenu has no previous records to show that he was arrested earlier and on his being released he had continued his illegal activities prejudicial to the interest of the State and nation so he may be released. Heard also, learned State counsel, Mr.Y. Ashang, who fairly submits that while going through the records, it appears that the detenu has no previous records as such that he was arrested and on being released he had involved himself with the activities prejudicial to the interest of the State and Nation. However, since there are information with the arresting authority that he is an active member of the banned organization, his detention under the National Security Act was justified to protect the interest of the State and Nation so he may not be released.

(2.) I have perused the detention order dated 18.6.2012, Annexure-A/1 at page-10, from where it appears that District Magistrate, Imphal West passed the detention order on the basis of Police report and detained the detenu w.e.f.18.6.2012 under the National Security Act,1980 on the ground that he may be released on bail by the Court as one other accused, Shri Huidrom Samananda Singh, was released in connection with FIR No.18(2) 2012.

(3.) After perusal of the records, I find that the District Magistrate has passed order purely on the basis of presumption and assumption; it is also not correct that obtained bail in one case is to be applied in the case of another. All the orders and judgments differ from case to case on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, I find the apprehension of the District Magistrate is mere on assumption and applied a kind of straight jacket formula which is not acceptable. When passing a detention order under the National Security Act,1980, application of mind is very very important. We must remember that National Security Act, 1980 has been adopted as a preventive measure and not for punitive measure. The Act needs to be applied with full caution and to be exercised only in extreme cases and not at random, as personal liberty or free movement is one of the fundamental rights of a person and that cannot be just curtailed whimsically until and unless it is extremely required to maintain the law and order. In this case, I do not find the situation arises at that level. Because records do not speak that the detenu was arrested earlier and on his being released he had gone back to the same trade and activities. Therefore, I find the detention order is ipse dixit. Therefore, it is hereby directed to release the detenu, namely Mr.Naoroibam Sanajaoba Singh (36 years) S/o N. Chaoba Singh of Heingang Awang Leikai, A/P Chingmeirong Maning Leikai, P.S. Heingang, District Imphal East, forthwith if he is not required in connection with other case(s).