PRAMOD YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ application for quashing initial order of detention dated 29.7.2000 passed under the National Security Act, Annexure -3, and also the final order dated 5.10.2000 confirming the order, Annexure -3, for a period of one year, Annexure -6.

(2.) THE petitioner is a citizen of India. He was made accused in Sahebpur Kamal P.S.Case No. 114/99 under section 25(1)(A) and 26 of the Arms Act, and also in Sahebpur Kamal P.S.Case No. 115/99 dated 14.8.1999 for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and also under section 27 of the Arms Act. He was in jail with effect from 14.8.1999 and his prayer for bail has been rejected up to the High Court. On 29.7.2000 initial order of detention under the National Security Act was passed by the District Magistrate, Begusarai, respondent no.3, stating there in ''I am satisfied that with a view to prevent Pramod Yadav, son of Basudeo Yadav, resident of village Rajapura, P.S. Sahebpur Kamal, District Begusarai from the action in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it is necessary to make an order that he be detained ''. Accordingly, order was passed that the petitioner be detained in Begusarai jail. The grounds of detention were served to the petitioner on 31.7.2000 while he was in jail. The petitioner filed representation against the detention order on 28.8.2000, Annexure -5, which was rejected on 13.9.2000. However, initial order of detention was confirmed vide order dated 5.10.2000 and the petitioner was ordered to be detained for a period of one year, Annexure -6.

(3.) A counter -affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.3. The affidavit was sworn by one Executive Magistrate and not by respondent no.3. It has been stated in the affidavit that petitioner is veteran criminal. His activities were prejudicial to maintenance of public order. Respondent no.3 has passed the order on the ground furnished by the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai after being satisfied. The petitioner filed the representation through jail Superintendent on 25.8.2000 on which the District Magistrate made comment and it was rejected on 13.9.2000. The order of detention is legal.