NAMAL CHANDRA BARUA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this Habeas Corpus application the petitioner challenges the validity of the order of detention under section 3(2) read with section 3(3) of the National Security Act; 1980, for short 'the Act'.

(2.) THE relevant facts necessary for determination of the main question which has come up for consideration are that on 21 -11 -84 the petitioner was detained under 'the Act' on the strength of the order of detention issued by the District Magistrate, Darrang, Mangaldai. The detaining authority was satisfied that with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order it was necessary to keep him under detention. The petitioner was served with the grounds of detention on 23 -11 -84. The petitioner made representation to the Government of Assam. The Governor of Assam, in exercise of power under section 12(1) of œthe Act  confirmed the order of detention on receipt of the report -of the Advisory Board and directed' that the petitioner shall be detained for a period of 12 months with effect from the date of detention.

(3.) IT has been contended by Mr. P.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner that failure to produce records and file affidavit by the Central Government clearly indicates that the report and the grounds of detention which were sent by the State Government were not considered by the Central Government. Mr. B.C. Das, learned counsel for the State Government submits that the State Government, in due compliance with the provision of section 3(5) of ˜the Act forwarded within seven days the report of the fact of detention of the petitioner together with the grounds on which the order has been made to the Central Government. This fact has been repeatedly confirmed by the respondents 1 and 2, the State of Assam and the detaining authority, respectively. Under these circumstances we have no hesitation in reaching the conclusion that the State Government has fully and faithfully complied with the mandatory provision contained in section 3(5) of the Act. We emphasize that under section 3(5) of the Act the State Government is obligated to send a report within a time bound period of seven days from the date of making the order or within seven days from the date of approval of the order of detention by the State Government. The necessity of early or quick despatch of the report and grounds of detention has been emphasized in section 3(5) of "the Act". It has certain positive purpose behind it Section 3(5) of the Act requires the State Government to be up and doing. No inaction is permitted. If the delay is beyond the statutory period, the order of detention becomes invalid. Such is the compulsion of the expression "within seven days". This command of Parliament is for the purpose of enabling the Central Government to consider the report and grounds etc. as expeditiously as possible. Under delay or unreasonable delay makes the order of detention invalid.