Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Sheeba Malik vs Union Of India on 29 July, 2013
Author: Vimla Jain
Bench: Vimla Jain
1
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR
DIVISON BENCH
WRIT PETITION No.20268/2012
Smt. Sheeba Malik, wife of Mukhtar
Malik, aged 42 years, resident of 34
Meel Obedullaganj, District Raisen, at
present r/o 66, Tolwali Masjid, Alok
Press Road, Police Station Tallaiya,
District Bhopal, M.P.
Versus
1. Union of India, through the
Secretary, Department of Home and
Internal Affairs, New Delhi.
2. State of Madhya Pradesh, through
the Secretary, Department of Home
and Internal Affairs, Vallabh Bhawan,
Bhopal, M.P.
3. Collector/District Magistrate,
Bhopal, M.P.
4. Superintendent of Police, Bhopal,
M.P.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the petitioner: Shri Manish Datt, Sr.Advocate, with
Shri Siddharth Datt, Advocate.
For the respondents: Shri R.S. Siddiqui, Assistant Solicitor General, for
the respondent No.1.
Shri Umesh Pandey, Government Advocate,
for the respondents No. 2 to 4.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESENT: HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH SAKSENA
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE VIMLA JAIN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of hearing: 11/07/2013
Date of Order: 29/07/2013
ORDER
Petitioner, by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of 2 India, has challenged the detention of her husband Mukhtar Malik in consequence of the order dated 15.9.2012 passed by the District Magistrate, Bhopal, the respondent No.3, which was approved by the State Government and also by the Advisory Board.
2. The facts, as narrated in the petition as well as in the return submitted by the respondents, are that petitioner's husband Mukhtar Malik has been detained by virtue of the order dated 15.9.2012 passed by the District Magistrate, Bhopal in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). This order was confirmed by the respondent No.2/State Government as per the provisions of Section 12(1) of the Act. The detention order of Mukhtar Malik has been passed on the grounds enumerated in Annexure P/2, which are as under:
" 3- fiNys o"kksZa 1982 ls 2010 ds e/; vkids }kjk 50 ckj vkijkf/kd ?kVuk,a ?kfVr dh xbZ A bu ?kVukvksa ds laca/k esa vkids fo:) fuEukuqlkj vijk/k dk;e fd;s x;s vkSj izdj.k U;k;ky; esa izLrqr fd;s x;s%& ¼01½ fn0 07-06-1982 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 106@82 /kkjk 376] 506 ch Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼02½ fn0 14-06-1983 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 113@83 /kkjk147] 341] 323 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼03½ fn0 04-08-85 dks Fkkuk ryS;k] ftyk Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 498@85 /kkjk 147] 148] 149] 308 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A U;k;ky; }kjk 25-09-91 dks cjh fd;k x;k A ¼04½ fn0 10-02-86 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 18@86 /kkjk 307] 147] 148 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼05½ fn0 08-09-87 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 178@87 /kkjk 341] 294] 323] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼06½ fn0 06-09-87 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 179@86 /kkjk 323] 341 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼07½ fn0 01-08-87 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 70@87 /kkjk 353] 186] 506 ch Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼08½ fn0 03-10-87 dks Fkkuk lqYrkuiqj ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 75@87 3 /kkjk 379] 353] 186] 506 ch Hkknfo ,oa 26 ou vf/kfu;e ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼09½ fn0 17-10-87 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 204@87 /kkjk 341] 294] 506 ch Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼10½ fn0 03-02-88 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 27@88 /kkjk 363] 365] 384 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼11½ fn0 25-04-88 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 99@88 /kkjk 325] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼12½ fn0 28-02-89 dks Fkkuk lqYrkuiqj] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 32@89 /kkjk 332] 353] 294] 506] 392 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼13½ fn0 28-02-89 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 43@89 /kkjk 376] 341] 506 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼14½ fn0 28-03-89 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 67@89 /kkjk 374] 342] 506 ch Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼15½ fn0 27-02-90 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 233@90 /kkjk 353] 332] 186] 307] 224 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼16½ fn0 28-09-90 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 234@90 /kkjk 332] 186] 294] 22 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼17½ fn0 19-02-91 dks Fkkuk& mejkoxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 23@91 /kkjk 365] 224] 511] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼18½ fn0 27-10-91 dks Fkkuk ryS;k] ftyk Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 778@91 /kkjk 307 Hkknfo ,oa 25@27 vkElZ ,DV ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼19½ fn0 09-01-92 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 06@92 /kkjk 223] 225] 353] 120 ch Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼20½ fn0 31-01-92 dks Fkkuk mejkoxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 6@92 /kkjk 307] 34] Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼21½ fn0 07-06-94 dks Fkkuk& tgkaxhjkckn Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 494@94 /kkjk 307] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼22½ fn0 28-11-94 dks Fkkuk& ryS;k Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 535@94 /kkjk 341] 294] 506] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼23½ fn0 29-11-94 dks Fkkuk& ryS;k Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 537@94 /kkjk 294] 506 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼24½ fn0 20-03-95 dks Fkkuk& lqYrkuiqj] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 40@95 /kkjk 147] 148] 506] 427 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼25½ fn0 03-07-95 dks Fkkuk& lqYrkuiqj] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 75@95 /kkjk 294@506 ch Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼26½ fn0 20-06-95 dks Fkkuk& ryS;k Hkkssiky esa vijk/k dz0 350@95 /kkjk 307] 34 ch Hkknfo ,oa 25 vkElZ ,DV ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼27½ fn0 06-08-96 dks Fkkuk& ryS;k Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 495@96 /kkjk 506 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A 4 ¼28½ fn0 10-07-96 dks Fkkuk& tgkaxhjkckn Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 410@96 /kkjk 141] 148] 149] 302] 307] 109] 120 Hkknfo ,oa 25 vkElZ ,DV ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼29½ fn0 28-10-96 dks Fkkuk& Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 216@96 /kkjk 393] 506 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼30½ fn0 07-01-97 dks Fkkuk& lqYrkuiqj] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 129@96 /kkjk 393] 392] 506] 211] 213 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼31½ fn0 07-01-97 dks Fkkuk& vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 06@97 /kkjk 365] 366] 384] 212] 216,] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼32½ fn0 08-01-97 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 07@97 /kkjk 307] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼33½ fn0 08-01-97 dks Fkkuk vkScsnqYykxat] ftyk jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 08@97 /kkjk 307] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼34½ fn0 10-01-97 dks Fkkuk& fcyf[kfj;k] ftyk Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 07@97 /kkjk 25 vkElZ ,DV ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼35½ fn0 11-01-02 dks Fkkuk& ,e0ih0uxj] Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 25@02 /kkjk 386] 342] 506] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼36½ fn0 09-09-02 dks Fkkuk& ,eih uxj Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 571@02 /kkjk 294] 506 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼37½ fn0 06-03-2000 dks Fkkuk& ryS;k Hkksiky ds jks0lk0 388@2000 pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k A ¼38½ fn0 08-03-2000 dks Fkkuk& ryS;k Hkksiky ds jks0lk0 388@2000 pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k A ¼39½ fnukad 04-05-2001 Fkkuk ryS;k Hkksiky ds jks0lk0 200@2001 pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k A ¼40½ fnukad 21-01-2002 ryS;k Hkksiky ds jks0lk0 388@2000 pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k A ¼41½ fnukad 22-03-2003 ryS;k Hkksiky ds jks0lk0 1377@2003 pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k A ¼42½ fnukad 11-04-2003 ryS;k Hkksiky ds jks0lk0 738@2003 pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k A ¼43½ fnukad 23-05-2003 ryS;k Hkksiky ds jks0lk0 1473@2003 pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k A ¼44½ fnukad 19-0-2003 ryS;k Hkksiky ds jks0lk0 1160@2003 pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k A ¼45½ fn0 24-01-2003 dks Fkkuk& 'kkg0ckn Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 586@03 /kkjk 307] 34] 120ch Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼46½ fn0 27-04-2005 dks Fkkuk& vkScsnqYykxat] jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 154@05 /kkjk 341] 294] 323] 506 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼47½ fn0 11-05-2006 dks Fkkuk& vkScsnqYykxat] jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 235@06 /kkjk 451] 294] 506] 507] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼48½ fn0 11-05-2006 dks Fkkuk& vkScsnqYykxat] jk;lsu esa vijk/k dz0 235@06 /kkjk 451] 294] 506] 507] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼49½ fn0 27-09-2009 dks Fkkuk& ryS;k Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 283@09 /kkjk 294] 323] 384] 506] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A ¼50½ fn0 12-12-2010 dks Fkkuk& 'kkg0ckn Hkksiky esa vijk/k dz0 647@10 5 /kkjk 387] 294] 506] 34 Hkknfo ds rgr pkyku U;k;ky; esa is'k fd;k x;k A 4@ vkidks o"kZ 1995 esa ftykn.Mkf/kdkjh] Hkksiky ds vkns'k dzekad 30@,u,l,@1995 fnukad 05@07@1995 }kjk jk"Vªh; lqj{kk vf/kfu;e 1980 dh /kkjk 3¼2½ ds rgr fujks/k esa fy;k x;k A fnukad 26@08@95 dks tsy ls eqDr gksus ij vki iqu% vkijkf/kd xfrfof/k;ksa esa fyIr gks x;s A 5@ vkidks o"kZ 2002 esa ftykn.Mkf/kdkjh] Hkksiky ds vkns'k dzekad 01@,u,l,@2002 fnukad 04@02@2002 }kjk jk"Vªh; lqj{kk vf/kfu;e 1980 dhs /kkjk 3¼2½ ds rgr fujks/k esa fy;k x;k fujks/k vof/k ¼,d o"kZ ½ fnukad 04@02@2003 dks iw.kZ gksus ds mijkar vki tsy ls eqDr gksus ij vki iqu% vkijkf/kd xfrfof/k;ksa esa fyIr gks x;s A 6@ vkidks vfrfjDr ftykn.Mkf/kdkjh Hkksiky ds vkns'k dzekad 83@2003 fnukad 18@11@2003 }kjk e0iz0 jkT; lqj{kk vf/kfu;e 1990 rgr ftykcnj fd;k x;k Fkk A blds i'pkr iqu% vkidks vfrfjDr ftykn.Mkf/kdkjh Hkksiky ds vkns'k dzekad 83@2003 fnukad 18@11@2003 }kjk e0iz0 jkT; lqj{kk vf/kfu;e 1990 ds rgr ftykcnj fd;k x;k A 7@ bl izdkj foxr o"kkZsa esa vkids }kjk ?kfVr vusdksa vijk/kksa esa vkids fo:) U;k;ky; esa pkyku izLrqr fd;s x;s] vkidks nks ckj jk"Vªh; lqj{kk vf/kfu;e ds varxZr fu:) fd;k x;k ,oa nks ckj e/;izns'k jkT; lqj{kk vf/kfu;e 1990 ds varxZr ftykcnj fd;k ijarq vkids vkpj.k esa lq/kkj ugha vk;k gS A 8@ fiNys ,d o"kZ esa Hkh vkids }kjk Hkksiky ftys esa yxkrkj vkijkf/kd ?kVuk,a ?kfVr dh tk jgh gSa rFkk vke yksxksa dks fujarj vkrafdr fd;k tk jgk gS A vkidk vkrad bruk c<+ x;k gS fd dbZ ?kVukvksa esa yksx vkids fo:) vijk/k dk;e djkus esa rFkk lk{; nsus ls Hkh ?kcjkrs gSa ftys esa ,d o"kZ esa vkids fo:) fuEukuqlkj ?kVuk,a ?kfVr dh xbZ gSa%& ¼1½ fnukad 15@08@2012 dks vki vius lkfFk;ksa ds lkFk feydj yksxksa dks Mjk /kedk dj tcju iSlksa dh ekaxdj jgs Fks vkids mDr d`R; ls {ks= esa vkrad dk okrkoj.k O;kIr gksdj yksd O;oLFkk dks vklUu [krjk mRiUu gks x;k A ¼2½ fnukad 02@09@2012 dks vki vius lkFk;ksa ds lkFk feydj yksxksa dks Mjk /kedk dj tcju iSlksa dh ekaxdj jgs Fks vkids mDr d`R; ls {ks= esa Hk; o vkrad dk okrkoj.k O;kIr gksdj yksd O;oLFkk dks vklUu [krjk mRiUu gks x;k A ¼3½ fnukad 04@09@2012 dks vkius vius lkfFk;ksa ds lkFk ohul ekCkZy dh nqdku ij cSB dj cky eqdan oS".ko iq= :inkl oS".ko dks cqyk;k rFkk mlls tcju ikap yk[k :i;ksa dh ekax dh xbZ A mlds }kjk euk djus ij vkius lkfFk;ksa ds lkFk feydj mls Mjk;k /kedk;k rFkk vkids }kjk mls tku ls ekjus dh /kedh nh xbZ A vkids mDr d`R; ls vke ukxfjd Hk;Hkhr ,oa vkrafdr gSa vkSj {ks= esa Hk; ,oa vkrad dk okrkoj.k O;kIr gksdj yksd O;oLFkk dks vklUu [krjk mRiUu gks x;k gS A 9@ mijksDr ?kVukvksa ds laca/k esa Jh ,e0vkj0[kku] Fkkuk izHkkjh Fkkuk ryS;k] Hkksiky us Hkh lk{; fn;s gSa A mDr lk{; ls bu ?kVukvksa dh iqf"V gksrh gS fd fiNys ,d o"kZ esa vkids }kjk ?kfVr dh xbZ ?kVukvksa vkSj xfrfof/k;ksa ls yksd O;oLFkk izHkkfor gqgZ gS] vkSj ftys ds yksx vkids Hk; ls vkrafdr gSa A o"kZ 1982 ls ysdj o"kZ 2012 rd vki laifRr ds fookn dks gy djus esa yxs gq, gSa A ftlesa fof/k ds fo:) edku [kkyh djkus ds dke djrs gSa] laifRr ij voS/k :i ls dCtk dj jgs gSa rFkk vki vke ukxfjdksa rFkk O;kikfj;ksa ls gQ~rk olwyh bR;kfn ds dk;Z dj jgs gSa A vkidk Hk; o vkrad bruk c<+ x;k gS fd yksx vkids fo:) iqfyl esa fjiksVZ ntZ djkus ugha tk jgs gSa A Hkksiky uxj ds yksx vkids vkrad o Mj ls vkids fo:) xokgh ugha nsrs gSa A vr% eSa larq"V gWaw fd vkids }kjk ?kfVr ?kVukvksa ls vkidks ;fn Lora= NksM+k x;k vkSj vkidh xfrfof/k;ksa dks rRdky izHkko ls fu;af=r ugha fd;k x;k rks ftys dh yksd 6 O;oLFkk ij foijhr izHkko iMs+xk A 10@ pwafd Hkksiky uxj ,d vfrlaosnu'khy uxj gS vkSj vkidh vklekftd ,oa vkijkf/kd xfrfof/k;ksa esa dksbZ fu;a=.k ugha gqvk gS vkSj uxj dh yksd O;oLFkk ckj&ckj Hkax gksus dh laHkkouk fujarj cuh gqbZ gS A vkidh vlekftd ,oa lekt fojks/kh xfrfof/k;ksa ij lkekU; dkuwu }kjk fu;a=.k j[kk tkuk vlaHko izrhr gksrk gS A vkidh vlkekftd ,oa vkijkf/kd xfrfof/k;ksa dks fu;af=r ugha fd;k x;k rks uxj dh yksd O;oLFkk dHkh Hkh Hkax gks ldrh gS A"
(3) Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the detention order mainly on three grounds - (1) that the offences registered against the detenu from 7.6.1982 to 27.9.2009 were already the subject matter of the detenu's erlier detention order dated 9th December, 2009 passed by the District Magistrate which after consideration, High Court quashed by order dated 21.3.2010 passed in Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) No.781/2010. Therefore, the grounds taken for detention of detenu for the aforesaid period could not have been repeated in the instant detention order; (2) that the grounds pertaining to offences registered against detenu on 15.8.2012, 2.9.2012 and 4.9.2012 were vague and pertained to merely law and order problem and did not tend to affect the public order of the society; and (3) that at the time when the detention order was passed i.e. on 15.9.2012, the detenu had already been arrested and he was in custody in connection with Crime No.795/2012 registered against him under Section 25/27/35 of the Indian Arms Act on 14.9.2012. The detaining authority was not made aware of this fact. As such, the detention order was passed without application of mind. (4) Learned counsel for the respondents have supported the detention order contending that it was made on relevant and valid grounds. (5) After perusal of the order dated 31.3.2010 passed in Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) No.781/2010 we find that the grounds narrated in the 7 instant detention order which pertained to the offences registered against detenu from 7.6.1982 to 27.9.2009 were subject matter of the earlier detention order passed against detenu on 9th December, 2009. This Court, after consideration of those grounds, concluded that the aforesaid acts of the detenu did not amount to causing disturbance of the public order as the degree and extent thereof did neither result in panic and terror to the persons of the locality nor affected public at large. In view of the above finding recorded by this Court, the aforesaid cases narrated against detenu cannot be held to have made out valid grounds of detention in isolation to other grounds. No doubt the aforesaid incidents can be taken into consideration as a past conduct of detenu for appreciating his future course of conduct. (6) Similarly the fact that detenu was detained under the provisions of National Security Act earlier by passing detention orders against him on 5.7.1995 and 4.2.2002 and further that an externment order passed against him by the District Magistrate on 18.11.2003 can be taken into consideration to contribute the formation of the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority only if recent grounds on which the detention order is passed primafacie make out a case of the breach of public order. In other terms, previous conduct of a detenu can help detaining authority in reinforcing his satisfaction that without detaining the detenu the disturbance of public order by him cannot be prevented. The instant detention order was passed on the basis of incidents dated 15.8.2012, 2.9.2012 and 4.9.2012.
(7) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 8 incidents dated 15.8.2012 and 2.9.2012 are vague and give no particulars about any occurrence. They are general in nature which could have been concocted by the police at their whims. On perusal of record, we find that in respect of these two incidents the police submitted only two Rojnamcha entries. As per Rojnamcha No.1013 dated 16.8.2012 Sub Inspector Ashok Bharavi reported that during his visit in the area he received information that proclaimed offender Mukhtar Malik was active with his associates and was purchasing and selling the land after frightening the people. He also came to know that after creating terror he was extorting money from the people. People were under his terror, therefore, they were scared of lodging any report. A similar Rojnamcha entry was made in the same police station on 2.9.2012 which revealed that during his round in the area Inspector M.R. Khan received information that proclaimed offender Mukhtar Malik was involved in unsocial activities and was intimidating people by causing terror. He was indulging in deals of land in the neighbouring areas of Bhopal. For earning money illegally, he was indulging in criminal activities. He also used to recover money from the people. Since there was terror of Mukhtar Malik, nobody dared to lodge report.
(8) Except the aforesaid Rojnamcha entries there was no material in the record. A bare perusal of these reports indicates vagueness. In our opinion, such type of vague reports made by police officers even against a habitual offender could not have made a ground for subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority for passing an order of detention. Thus, in our opinion, the grounds formulated on the basis of mere 9 Rojnamcha entries dated 15.8.2012 and 2.9.2012, in the absence of other relevant material, have to be held vague and not sufficient for reaching the subjective satisfaction required for passing of a detention order under the Act.
(9) The ground pertaining to incident dated 4.9.2012 wherein the allegation against the detenu is that he forcibly called Bal Mukund Vaishnav at Venus Marble Shop and made a demand of Rs.5 lacs. When he denied, associates of detenu intimidated him to kill. Though it has been stated in the ground that by his aforesaid conduct the people in general got terrorized and an atmosphere of fear and terror was created in the locality causing disruption of public order, but it can be appreciated that this incident pertained to a particular individual and could not have affected the peace and tranquility of public at large. On perusal of the first information report lodged by the complainant Bal Mukund it is apparent that the incident occurred in the course of dealings in business. There was some dispute about the return of money paid by one Amita for purchase of a house. The incident occurred when she cancelled the deal and demanded her money back. Though it is stated in the first information report that the associates of detenu against the wish of complainant took him to the house of detenu where he intimidated him to return the money, but all these facts go to indicate that the criminal act of detenu emanated from business dealing:
(10) In case of Subhas Bhandari v. District Magistrate, Lucknow and others - Air 1988 SC 74 the Apex Court observed that :
"In the instant case the alleged act of assault by fire-10
arms is confined to the complainant Surya Kumar and not to others. It is an act infringing law and order and the reach and effect of the act is not so extensive as to affect considerable members of the society. In other words, this act does not disturb public tranquility nor does it create any terror or panic in the minds of the people of the locality nor does it affect in any manner the even tempo of the life of the community. This criminal act emanates from business rivalry between the detenus and the complainant, therefore, such an act cannot be the basis for subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority to pass an order of detention on the ground that the impugned act purports to affect public order I.e. the even tempo of the life of the community which is the sole basis for clamping the order or detention. ...... Thus it is the degree and extent of the reach of the act upon the society which is vital for considering the question whether a man has committed only a breach of law and order or has acted in a manner likely to cause disturbance to public order."
Similarly it was observed in Golam Hussain @ Gama v. The Commissioner of Police, Calcutta and others - (1974) 4 SCC 530 that the nature of the act, the circumstances of its commission, the impact on people around and such like factors constitute the pathology of public disorder. The act cannot be isolated from its public setting but is to be taken with its total effect on the flow of orderly life. It may be a question of the degree and quality of activity of the sensitivity of the situation and the psychic response of the involved people. (11) In view of the above propositions of law, we find that the aforesaid grounds did not amount to causing of disturbance to the public order. As such they could not be held to be valid grounds for passing detention order .
(12) Learned senior counsel next submitted that the detaining authority mechanically passed the detention order without taking into 11 consideration that at the time of passing of the order detenu was already in custody since he was arrested on 14.9.2012 itself in Crime No.795/2012 under Section 25/27/35 of the Arms Act. (13) Learned counsel for the State has filed the first information report registered by Inspector Umesh Chauhan wherein it has been mentioned that detenu was arrested while going in his car. At that time he was in possession of a pistol without license. After arrest, he was confined in police station.
(14) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has also filed order sheet dated 15.9.2012 of the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhopal wherein it has been mentioned that petitioner was arrested on 14.9.2012 and was produced before him on 15.9.2012. Thus, it is abundantly clear that detenu was already in custody on 15.9.2012 when the detention order was passed. It is also surprising when the matter was placed before the District Magistrate, no first information report in respect of the offence under the Arms Act was produced before him whereby he could have been made aware of the fact that detenu was in custody. Since he was not aware that detenu was in custody in connection with a serious offence, the detention order passed by him reveals non-application of mind on its part. True, the detention order could have been passed even if the detenu was in custody, but it was necessary for the District Magistrate to have considered the fact if there was any reasonable probability of detenu's release on bail.
(15) The Apex Court in case of Huidrom Konungjao Singh v. State of Manipur and others - (2012) 7 SCC 181 after considering the 12 earlier decisions held:
"9. In view of the above, it can be held that there is no prohibition in law to pass the detention order in respect of a person who is already in custody in respect of criminal case. However, if the detention order is challenged the detaining authority has to satisfy the Court the following facts:
(1) The authority was fully aware of the fact that the detenu was actually in custody.
(2) There was reliable material before the said authority on the basis of which it could have reasons to believe that there was real possibility of his release on bail and further on being released he would probably indulge in activities which are prejudicial to public order.
(3) In view of the above, the authority felt it necessary to prevent him from indulging in such activities and therefore, detention order was necessary.
In case either of these facts does not exist the detention order would stand vitiated. The present case requires to be examined in the light of the aforesaid settled legal proposition."
This Court also in case of Chhenu alias Yunus v. State of M.P. and another - 2011(1) MPHT 208 (DB) quashed the detention of detenu observing:
"There is nothing to indicate the awareness of the Detaining Authority that detenu was already in jail and yet the impugned order was made. This, in our opinion, clearly exhibits non-application of mind and would result in invalidation of the order."
(16) In view of the foregoing discussion, we allow this writ petition, quash the impugned detention order dated 15.9.2012 passed by the District Magistrate Bhopal and direct that detenu Mukhtar Malik be released immediately from custody, if he is not required in any other case.
(RAKESH SAKSENA) (SMT. VIMLA JAIN)
JUDGE JUDGE
shukla
13
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR
Writ Petition No.20268/2012
Smt. Sheeba Malik
vs.
Union of India & others
ORDER
For consideration
(Rakesh Saksena)
JUDGE
__/07/2013
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Jain
JUDGE
__/07/2013
POST FOR __/07/2013
(Rakesh Saksena)
Judge
__/07/2013