BISHANPAL SINGH ALIAS FAUJI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Bishanpal Singh alias Fauji was detained vide detention order dated 22.4.1984 by the District Magistrate, Jullundur. in exercise of powers under section 3(2) and 3(3) of National Security Act, 1980. There were two grounds of detention which are quoted hereafter :

(2.) IN the recent past, you have developed contacts with the leading Members of the Akali Dal of the area, namely, Sh. Bhajan Singh Akali Jathedar, village Tehang, Jatehdar Saroop Singh s/o Kehar Singh, village Kang Dhesian, Members S.G.P.C., and others, and you assisted them in taking a large Jatha to Amritsar, for the purpose of violation of prohibitory orders in Amritsar and offering of arrests. You yourself participated in this jatha. While at Amritsar, you developed contacts with Surinder Singh alias Chhinda r/o village Jagalpur, P.S. Sadar, Phagwara; Surjit Singh, r/o Maluwal, P. S. Bhatinda; and Daljit Singh alias Lati of Harke Transport, Gol Bagh, Amritsar, who were known smugglers and supporters of the All India Sikh Students Federation, which has been banned vide order of the Govt. of India dated 19.3.1984. You are also known to have a close association with Mohan Singh s/o Gulzar Singh r/o Kadian, and Amarjit Singh of village Sangh Dhesian, who are known activists of the now banned A.I.S.S.F. and are the accused in F.I.R. No. 137 dated 8.3.1984 under Section 308/325, 148/149 I.P.C., P. S. City, Phagwara, in which it is alleged that they beat up Sh. Hardev Singh s/o Gurnam Singh of village Ghurka, P.S. Gorya, and Tara Singh s/o Piara Singh Sani, r/o village Usmanpur, P.S. Nawanshahr, Jai Gopal s/o Harbans Lal Dhiman, all students of Phagwara. It is alleged that the cause of the enmity between the above two groups was that the former were workers of the now banned A.I.S.S.F. and the latter were the members of the Students Federation of India. Your intention in developing these contacts is to offer financial assistance to these members of the A.I.S.S.F. and also training the use of arms in which you are proficient as a result of your Military background. These facts have been reported vide secret report of S.I. Jaskirat Singh, S.H.O., P.S. Nurmahal dated 20-4-1984 at Annexure B' and secret report of S 1. Jaskirat Singh, S.H.O., P.S. Nurmahal, dated 18-4-1984 at Annexure 'C'. There is also a statement of Sh. Balwant Rai s/o Mohan Lal made before S.I. Jaswant Singh S.H.O., P.S. Phillaur, at Annexure 'D'. For your association and assistance rendered by you to the members of the now banned A.I.S.S.F., case F.I.R. No. 133 dated 20-4-1984 inter alia under Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, has been registered against you. A copy of F.I.R. No. 133 dated 21-4-1984 along with addition of offence under Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities Act (Prevention) Act is at Annexures 'E' and 'F' copy of F.I.R. No. 137 dated 8-3-1984 P.S. City, Phagwara, is at Annexure 'G' and copy of recovery memo dated 22-4.1984 made at the time of your arrest in F I R. No. 138 dated 21-4-1994 P.S. Phillaur, is at Annexure 'H'. Photostat copy of the notebook recovered from you in which inter alia the name of Surinder Singh alias Chhinda appears at page 56. is at Annexure 'I'. A copy of the order of the Govt. of India banning the A.I.S.S.F. under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, is at Annexure 'J'." As is plain, the grounds have their (sic) and hues though numerically they are two in number. The petitioner challenges the detention order by way of this petition for habeas carpus. The petitioner termed ground No. 1 to be irrelevant and vague. He contended that the copies of the first four F.I.Rs had not been supplied to him and thus the material supplied, whatever, was inadequate denying him the opportunity of proper representation. Further more, he contended that the fourth F.I.R. mentioned therein being F.I.R No. 31 of 1981 had resulted in his acquittal, thus rendering the ground non-existent. And, lastly, no detention order could be passed on the basis of registration of F.I.Rs alone in that context.

(3.) ON the other hand, the District Magistrate, Jullundhur who passed the order of detention, has countered the material points raised in the petition by contending that the grounds of detention provide grounds to believe that the detenu is a person who had a criminal record and had a predeliction of violating the law and committing acts of violence. Further, it is stated by him that there are grounds to believe that the detenu is connected with the banned organisation of All India Sikh Students Federation as also with the Akali Morcha, which pertained to the commission of acts of violence and the violation of prohibitory orders passed by the authorities responsible for maintaining the public order With regard to F.I.R No 31 of 1981 mentioned at Serial No. 4 of ground No. 1, shelter was taken by him that since it pertained to district Hoshiarpur, he was denying it for want of knowledge, but otherwise both the grounds were stated to be existing, clear, relevant and specific. It was also highlighted that the detenu was formerly employed in the Army and was proficient in the use of weapons; his intention being of developing contacts with the members of All India Sikh Students Federation and to render them financial assistance as also to train them in the use of arms.