CHANDOO RAM Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these two writ petitions the learned Judge of his Court (Thakur J.) has referred three questions of law for consideration by a larger bench of the Court. As the facts in both the petitions are similar and questions of law are common in both, so with the consent of the parties and for their convenience both these petitions were heard together by us and are being 'disposed of by one judgment.

(2.) IN writ petition No. 265, the petitioner is one Chandu Ram. His case is that on the Bight intervening 28th and 29th of November 1973, the Sub Inspector of Police, Hiranagar, arrested him from his place of residence in village Bhiaya Tehsil Hiranagar and at the time of arrest no warrant was shown to him. He was thereafter taken to Kathua and according to him a false case against him was instituted under Sections 270/272, R. P. O. , 36/13 D. I. R. 3/7 H. P. C. 0. 3/7 B. C. Act. 4-A E. G. C. O. and 28/ 32 J. and K. Security Act. The petitioner filed an application under Section 497. Criminal P. O. before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kathua, on December 1 1973. The prayer for bail by the petitioner was allowed by the said Magistrate on December 10, 1973 and the petitioner was ordered to be released. As soon as the order of release was communicated to the police authorities at detention where the petitioner was lodged, the petitioner was again brought out and sent to the Central Jail, Jammu where he was served with a notice of detention under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. 1971 and also with the grounds of detention. As regards the grounds of detention communicated to him, the petitioner submitted that he had not committed any offence and he was not a partner in the alleged carrying on of the unlawful trade of preparing and selling unlawful spurious turmerics within of outside the State of Jammu and Kashmir and that the grounds are those which were the subject matter of criminal investigation in respect of the casein which the petitioner had been already released on bail on December, 10, 1973. There were other denials also and inter alia it was also alleged in the petition that the grounds of detention are vague and cannot form the basis of detention of the petitioner under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act.

(3.) IN Writ Petition No. 268 of 1973 there are two petitioners viz. Sarban Kumar and Hansraj. They have stated in their petition that on the night intervening 28th and 29th of November 1973, they were sleeping in their respective houses. Sarban was not taken into custody on that night and Hansraj petitioner was taken from his house by the Police-to Kathua. The petitioner Hansraj was how-ever arrested on the subsequent day from his-house and a false case has been registered against the petitioner along with others in which the petitioner along with other persons were ordered to be released on bail on December 10, 1973. But as soon as the order of release of the petitioners had reached the police station Kathua, the police authorities put the petitioner in the police wagon and took them to Central Jail, Jammu where they were served with an order of detention under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. 1971. In this case also there was a denial of the allegations in the grounds of detention and then it was also pleaded that the grounds were vague and they were not such which could attract the provisions of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act.