SHRI DOHAWLA Vs. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE propose to set out in the main two of the grounds which had led to the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority in the present case to order for the detention of the Petitioner to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the State. We are doing go because infirmities in these two grounds are sufficient according to us to set the detenu at liberty. These grounds along with para 1 of the grounds read as below:

(2.) THAT your such activities have been disturbing the public order and endangering the security of the State in Mizoram will be evident from the facts and particulars given below and it is necessary to prevent you from acting in such a manner.

(3.) WE are, therefore, of the view that ground 2(G) was an irrelevant ground. It is worth pointing out that the activity mentioned in ground 2(G) cannot be said to have any relation by itself with endangering the security of the State. This incident has really found place in the ground to support the contention of the State that Petitioner's activity supported the M.N.F. which is engaged in secessionist activity. But then on 22.10.81 the M.N.F. was not an unlawful organization and there is nothing to show that on or about that day the M.N.F. was indulging in secessionist activity. it is also not the case of the State that anything about it wan discussed in the meeting.