SUBODHYADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has been detained in preventive custody under Section 12 (2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act 1981 (in short, the Act) by the District Magistrate, Begusarai vide Order No. 725/L dated 5.4.2002. The detention has been confirmed by the State Government in terms of Section 21 (1) read with Section 22 of the Act vide Order No. 6091 dated 1.6.2002 of the Home (Police) Department. In between, the detention had been approved by the Government in terms of Section 12 (3) of the act on 13.4.2002. The petitioner seeks quashing of the said orders and his release from detention.

(2.) SHRI Pramod Manbansh, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner has been detained in view of certain acts allegedly committed by him as mentioned in the grounds of detention but the incidents referred to therein, even on their face value, are not likely to affect public order. These acts were directed against individuals and at best may constitute breach of law and order without disrupting maintenance of public order and as such the impugned detention must be set aside as being beyond the scope of preventive detention under the Act.

(3.) IT need hardly be emphasised that the preventive detention of a person is the result of subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority and while making judicial review of the order the High Court is not supposed to weigh the materials, as if sitting in appeal, and go into the question of satisfaction. Nevertheless, perusal of the details of the incidents mentioned in the grounds of detention leaves little room for doubt that there was sufficient basis for the detaining authority to arrive at a satisfaction. Clearly, the fall out of the acts allegedly committed by the petitioner was enough to affect the even flow of life and community at large and, it cannot be said that the allegations levelled against the petitioner remained in realm of breach of law and order and not breach of public order. The contention of the counsel is accordingly rejected.