RAVINDER SINGH ALIAS LADI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE detention order dated October 14, 1987, was passed by the District Magistrate, Hoshiarpur, under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980, against Ravinder Singh petitioner and he has challenged the same on the grounds given in the petition. The case of the petitioner is that four FIRs were registered against him and he has been allowed bail in all the four FIRs and the detaining authority has not taken into account that he was an under -trial and had been allowed bail by the Court of competent jurisdiction. In fact, his main grievance is that the order has been passed without any application of mind on the part of the detaining authority. The detention order was, therefore, void and liable to be quashed on this ground. Reliance has been placed on Anant Sakharam Raut v. State of Maharashtra and another, 1988(1) R.C.R.(Criminal) 619 : AIR 1987 SC 137.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. It is not disputed (as orders have been placed on the file) that the petitioner has been allowed bail in all the four FIRs registered against him. However, there is no mention in the detention order as to whether the detaining authority was aware at the time of the passing of the detention order that the petitioner has been enlarged on bail in the said cases. In view of the law laid down in Anant Sakharam Raut's case (supra) the order evidently suffers from the absence of application of mined on the part of the detaining authority while passing the detention order. One does not know how the detaining authority would have acted if he was aware of the bail having been granted to the petitioner in the four cases registered against him. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Anand Sakharam Raut's case (supra), this order of detention passed against the petitioner dated October 14, 1987, is liable to be quashed on this ground alone.

(3.) THE result of the aforesaid discussion is that the detention of the petitioner is quashed and he is ordered to be released forthwith, if he is not wanted in any other case. Order accordingly.