SANASAM IRABANTA SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions i. e. W. P. (Cril) No. 56 of 2009 and W. P. (Cril) No. 57 of 2009, challenging the detention orders on the same question of facts and law, are taken up for joint hearing and disposal by a common judgment and order.

(2.) HEARD Mr. Ph. Sanajaoba, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. S. Reisang, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as well as Mr. Amarjit Naorem, learned C. G. S. C. appearing for the respondent No. 3.

(3.) NO doubt, the doctrine of preventive power of the Administrative/executive authority, constitutionally validate preventive process for the maintenance of public order, security, of the State, national security, defence of India and relations of India with the foreign power. The Apex Court in Amir Shad Khan Vs. L. Hmingliana and Ors. : (1991) 4 SCC 39 held that- "the law of preventive detention is harsh to the person detained and, therefore, there can be no doubt that it must be strictly construed. Article 22 (3) (b) denies to a person who is arrested or detained under any law providing for preventive detention the protection of clauses (1) and (2) of the said article. Clause (4) thereof enjoins that the preventive detention law must conform to the limitations set out thereunder. Clause (5) on Article 22 reads as under: