DURG SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Durg Singh who has been detained under Section 3, Preventive Detention Act (No. 4) of 1950. His main contention is that the grounds supplied to him were so vague that he could not make a representation against the order. He therefore contends that he has been deprived of his personal liberty against the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as he has not been afforded the earliest opportunity of making a representation against the order of detention, granted to him under Article 22 (5) of the Constitution.

(2.) THE grounds, that have been supplied to the applicant, are these (1) that it has been established that when some dacoits visited his village, he took his meals with them in village which naturally shows that he knew the dacoits and they had come in the village at his instance, 2. that, he instigated the dacoits to enquire from one Bhera Darji about the gold 'gho-khru' 'ear-rings' that he used to wear, but was not wearing at the time when the dacoits visited the village,

(3.) THE first ground is that when dacoits visited the applicant's village, he took his meals with them which showed that he knew the dacoits, and that they had come in the village at his instance. It has not been mentioned who the dacoits were, and when they came to the village. THE ground is, therefore, obviously very vague, and it is not possible for the applicant to make an effective representation on account of its vagueness. If the probable date of the visits of the dacoits had been mentioned, the applicant might have been able to show that on that date he was not in the village at all but was somewhere else.