TIKAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who has been detained under the provisions of National Security Act, 1980 (in short NSA) has approached this Court through his mother Smt. Kesuli seeking quashing of the detention order.

(2.) AS per the averments made in the writ petition the petitioner and his brothers have been declared as trespassers over the agricultural land bearing Khasra No. 1236 measuring 18 Bighas and 2 Biswas by the revenue authorities. During the pendency of the litigation about the said land the police authorities registered false criminal cases against the petitioner and his brother. The brother of the petitioner namely Tej Singh was detained by the respondents 2 and 3 under the provisions of NSA for a period of one year and he has been released on 28.8.2001. While the period of one year of the preventive detention of aforesaid Tej Singh was about to expire the police authorities hatched up a conspiracy to initiate the proceedings under the NSA against the petitioner also and a false case was registered against him and one Deep Chand Meena under Section 399/402, IPC at Police Station, Masalpur District Karauli. The petitioner was arrested in the said case and vide order dated 31.8.2001 the respondent No. 3 was directed to detain the petitioner in Central Jail, Jaipur. While detaining the petitioner under the provisions of the NSA, copy of the order passed under Section 3(2) of the NSA was not supplied to him. The petitioner was however supplied the grounds of detention after the expiry of 10 days. The State Government approved the order of detention vide communication dated 5.9.2001 and the matter was referred to the Advisory Board. The mother of the petitioner submitted representation to the various authorities on 29.9.2001. The Advisory Board approved the detention of the petitioner and the State Government vide order dated 25.10.2001 passed the final order under Section 12 of the NSA and thereby kept the petitioner in detention for a period of one year i.e. 31.8.2001 to 30.8.2002. The representation submitted by the mother of the petitioner was rejected after much delay which was unexplained.

(3.) WE have heard the rival submissions and carefully scanned the material on record. The first contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner was in Jail on the date of passing of the impugned detention order on 31.8.2001. Therefore it was incumbent on the detaining authority while passing order under Section 3(2) of the NSA to have considered and mentioned in the order itself in case the detenu was detained under the provisions of NSA and there was likelihood of his being released on bail. Reliance is placed on Amrit Lal v. Union of India, ((2001) 1 SCC 341 and Binod Singh v. D.M. Dhanbad : 1986CriLJ1959 .