ABDUL LATIF Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Mr. D.K. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. T. Khro, learned Senior Government Advocate, Nagaland, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5. We have heard also Mr. B. Sarma, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1.

(2.) By making this writ application under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has, put to challenge the order, dated 24.2.2009, passed by respondent No. 4 herein, namely, Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur, Nagaland, placing the petitioner under preventive detention in exercise of powers under the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as The Act'), and has accordingly prayed for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus setting aside and quashing the impugned order of detention.

(3.) While considering the present writ petition, it is of paramount importance to note that in the present writ petition, the petitioner has averred that the Deputy Commissioner, who had passed the detention order, did not communicate the ground(s) on the basis of which the order of detention was passed. It is further averred, in the writ petition, that the ground(s) had not been prepared, formulated and/or signed by the detaining authority and that it is the Special Secretary to the Government of Nagaland, who formulated the grounds and signed the same on 7.3.2009, while approving the impugned order of detention, though the order of detention was passed as far back as on 24.2.2009. The averments, so made, which appear at paragraph 7 of the writ petition, reads as under :