HARKISHAN SINGH SURJEET Vs. STATE OF PANJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of six criminal miscellaneous petitions (Nos. 1087, 1101, 1103, 1106, mi and 1113 of 1963) Under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code for the release of Harkishan Singh Surjeet, Des Raj Chadha, Dalip Singh Tapiala, Chanan Singh Dhut, Hazara Singh Hamdum and Satwant Singh, respectively, who are being detained by the Stale of Punjab under the Defence of India Rules, 1962, as they involve common questions of fact and law for determination.

(2.) ON 20th November, 1962, the Governor of Punjab acting under Rule 30 (1) (b) of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) passed orders for detention of several communist workers, including the six petitioners (Des Raj and others), "with a view to preventing them from acting in a manner, prejudicial to the defence of India and civil defence. " The order was made in the name of the Governor and did not specify the period for which each of the petitioners was to be detained. Having been arrested in pursuance of these orders, the petitioners were committed to the custody of the Superintendent, District Jail, Hissar, where they are still being detained. As Rule 30 of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, does not prescribe the maximum period for which a person may be detained, the Central Government, with a view to ensure that a person once detained under that rule may not remain in detention for an indefinite period, has made provision in Rule 30-A for periodic review of the cases of such detenus. Sub-rule (9) of Rule 30-A, which is relevant for our purposes, runs as under:

(3.) IT is common case of the parties that in accordance with this provision the cases of all the six detenus had to be reviewed by the State Government in the first instance before 20th May, 1963. and in case of non-compliance with Rule 30-A (9), their detention after 19th May, 19and3, would be void. Failing to get any intimation from the authorities about any action taken under this Rule, each of the petitioners decided to move this Court Under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code. For that purpose, each of them, excepting Satwant Singh, swore an affidavit before the Superintendent, District Jail, Hissar on 9th September, 1963. Satwant Singh also made a similar affidavit, but that was on 10th September, 1963. On the basis of these affidavits, these six petitions and others were moved in this Court in the last week of September, 1963, through Shri Balbir Singh Bindra, Advocate, questioning the validity of the petitioners' detention and seeking directions in the nature of habeas corpus.