SAGOLSEM NINGOL PUYAM Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. N. Brojen Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Th. Ibohal, learned Addl. G. A. appearing on behalf of the respondents-1, 2 and 3 and Mr. K. Kumar, learned Addl. CGSC for the respondent No.4. Sworn affidavit received by the learned counsel for the Union of India by way of fax has also been presented to this Court and the learned counsel for the petitioner is not objecting about such counter-affidavit response of the Union of India therefore keeping in view the urgency in the matter, the same is accepted and accordingly is placed on the record.

(2.) In the present writ petition, the petitioner, the mother of detenu has prayed for quashing the detention order dated 3-6-2005 (Annexure-A/1) of Shri Puyam Ranachandra Singh (@ Bidhi @ Budhijao) passed by the District Magistrate, Imphal West District, Manipur under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short called "Act of 1980), in exercise of power under sub-section (3) of Section 3 of 'Act 1980' read with the Central Government Home Department Order No. 17(1)49/89/II (Pt) dated 3-3-2005.

(3.) The question for consideration are : (i) whether the Central Government is duty bound and is under statutory obligation under Section 14(1) of the National Security Act, 1980 (in short called 'Act 1980' hereinafter) to consider the report for revocation or modification sent by State Government under Section 3(5) of Act, 1980 with reasonable expedition or not to consider at all or may consider at any stage as its convenience irrespective of fact that no representation was made for and on behalf of the detenu to the Central Government? (ii) whether delay in disposal of representation of detenu by Central Government could be justifiable under 'Act 1980' without satisfactory explanation and reasons recorded existing on the record?