AMARPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE District Magistrate, Ludhiana passed this detention order on 22.5.1987 against the petitioner, holding that with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it was necessary to detain him. It is further stated in the order that the District Magistrate was aware that at that time the petitioner was confined in District Jail, Nabha in different cases, but he was likely to indulge in prejudicial activities to maintenance of public peace and order in the event of his release from jail on bail or otherwise. The grounds of detention attached to the said detention order are stated in brief as under :-

(2.) AFTER mentioning the above grounds, the District Magistrate, Ludhiana, stating to be satisfied about the above said activities, passed the detention order with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in the aforesaid manner in future. The petitioner was informed about his right to make a representation in writing against the detention order and was asked to make such representation to the State government through the Superintendent Jail as soon as possible. The petitioner was further assured that his representation within the stipulated period would be submitted to the Advisory Board and in case his representation was received late, the same would not be considered by the Board.

(3.) THE petitioner has alleged that the District Magistrate passed the impugned order without application of mind; inasmuch as a direction is given to Senior Superintendent of Police. Ludhiana to lodge the petitioner in District Jail, Nabha, whereas the petitioner was already in District, Jail, Nabha and the order should have been directed to Superintendent jail to continue the custody of the petitioner there. It is also mentioned that particulars of different cases, showing the knowledge of the District Magistrate were not given. It is further alleged that the District Magistrate did not mention at all as to whether the petitioner had been ordered to be released on bail in any case or not and as to what steps the petitioner has taken for his release on bail in any other case. The only independent non-official witness joined in the investigation in the alleged cases against the petitioner was Balbir Singh son of Mangal Singh, Jat resident of Rasulpur, Jora, District Patiala and this Balbir Singh had given an affidavit that in his presence no arm, ammunition or any other material had been recovered by the Police and that he was called at the Police Station Sadar, Patiala and was made to sign some papers. The affidavit of this witness has been reproduced in detail in the petition.