NISHANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs:

(2.) The factual background of the case is that a show cause notice dtd. 1/4/2023 was issued by learned District Magistrate-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh against the petitioner in CCA Case No. 23 of 2023 stating therein as to why not an order under Sec. 3(a)(b)(i)(ii) of Jharkhand Control of Crimes Act, 2002 be passed, as per report submitted by Superintendent of Police, Ramgarh vide letter no. 134/DCB dtd. 28/3/2023. The nature of general allegations against the petitioner is that following criminal cases have been registered against him:-

(3.) Assailing the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order is patently illegal and does not come within the ambit and scope of Sec. 3 of Jharkhand Control of Crimes Act, 2002. The impugned order has been passed merely on the proposal of Superintendent of Police on the basis of two criminal cases registered against the petitioner under the Indian Penal Code (in short I.P.C). Neither the petitioner is a habitual criminal nor does he belong to any gang of known criminals rather he is a law abiding person in the village and due to village politics and political vendetta, he has been involved in aforesaid two criminal cases in quick succession within a span of 15 days and branded by police as "anti-social element". The impugned order is based on extraneous considerations de hors the factual aspects of the case. Fundamental right of life and personal liberty which inheres "the right of privacy" is most cherished right of a citizen of India guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India and which is not even suspended at the time of Emergency, is being violated by putting unreasonable restrictions on the movement of the petitioner without following the "procedure established by law". The petitioner is a victim of executive excess, hence, directly took shelter of this Hon'ble Court for efficacious remedy, which cannot be available through slow process of appeal provided under Sec. 6 of the said Act and without compromising with his personal liberty.