UMRAOMAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are 14 petitions Under Section 491, Criminal P. C. and Article 226, Constitution of India.

(2.) PETITIONS Nos. 100 to 107 were presented in this Court on 2-91953 and petitions Nos. 108 to 113 on 5-9-1953. All these petitions involve similar questions of law and fact and are therefore dealt with by one judgment. The detenus were arrested under the orders of the District Magistrate, Jaipur, dated 31-8-1953, purporting to act under Clause (a) of Sub-section (2) of Section 3, Preventive Detention Act of 1950. The orders in all the cases are similar and were as follows: No.-Dated 31-8-1953. Whereas, I Ramniwas Hawa, District Magistrate, Jaipur, am satisfied that (name and description of detenu) is indulging in activities highly prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and tranquillity and whereas with a view to prevent him from acting in such a manner, it is considered essential to detain, him; I, in exercise of the powers conferred on me by Clause (1) of Sub-section (2) of Section 3, Preventive Detention Act, 1950, as amended by the Preventive Detention Amendment Acts of 1951 and 1952, ordered that the said (name and description of the detenu) shall be detained in jail for a period of one month as a class I detenu. Sd/- R. N. HAWA, District Magistrate, Jaipur.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners challenges the validity of the order on three grounds: that although detention of a person is authorised to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order the addition of a second ground that it was necessary to do so to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to public tranquillity was not authorised and inasmuch as an invalid reason was added to a valid reason it is impossible to determine the grounds which weighed with the Magistrate in ordering his detention and it is not possible to say that it was only on account of the valid reasons that the detention had been ordered.