Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The petitioner being a brother of Mohammed Kasim Khan (hereinafter referred to as '' Detenu'') filed this Writ Petition challenging the order of detention dated 29.04.2022 passed under the provision of National Security Act of 1980 (hereinafter will be referred to as '' Act,1980'' for convenience) and order of extension

- : 2 :-

dated 26.07.2022.
The facts of the case, in short, are as under :-
[1] The detenue was arrested on 29.04.2022 under the provision of National Security Act, 1980 and his maternal grandfather was served with the notice dated 30.04.2022 about the information of arrest of detenu. He submitted an application to meet the detenu in jail and same was allowed and family members were directed to meet the detenue on 13.05.2022. The petitioner sent representation to State Human Rights Commission, Bhopal, National Human Right Commission, Jail Authorities, Collector on 25.05.2022. According to the petitioner, neither detenue nor his family members were served upon copy of the detention order or the grounds or the material document leading to detention order. After great efforts, the detention order and grounds were received on 01.06.2022. A representation dated 04.06.2022 was sent by the petitioner to the Advisory Board, Secretary, Home Department, Central Government and Home Department Bhopal but same has not been considered or decided so far. According to the petitioner, the detenue was subjected to the NSA proceedings due to his past criminal records. Out of six criminal cases registered against him, two were registered on the same day in order to make ground to proceed against him under the provision of NSA. The petitioner filed writ petition challenging the order of detention being violation of his life enshrined under Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has also alleged that there is no compliance of Section 3(2), 3(3) of NSA Act by the learned Collector of Khargone.
[2] After notice, the respondents filed have reply by submitting that the detenue is involved in all types of criminal activities since 2012. He tried to disturbed the public harmony and piece during the Hindu Festival. The detaining authority after going through all the
- : 3 :-
documents placed it and after applying the mind has rightly passed the order of detention. It is further submitted that after arrest of detenue on 29.04.2022, the information of arrest was duly communicated to the detenue and his family members. The acknowledgment has been filed as Annexure R-2 and R-3. Therefore, there is no violation of any provision of NSA Act, 1980. It is further submitted that the State Government has duly approved the order of detention by passing the order dated 04.05.2022. Thereafter, the information with regard to the detention of the detenue was forwarded to the Central Government vide secrete letter dated 04.05.2022. It is further submitted that the Advisory Board constituted under Section 9 of the NSA, 1980 was opined that there are sufficient cause for detention of detenue, thereafter in exercise of power under Section 12 of NSA,1980, vide order dated 17.06.2022, the Government of Madhya Pradesh has passed the order of detention of three months from the date of arrest. Hence, Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed in view of the law laid by the Apex Court in case of State of Utthar Pradesh and others Vs. Sanjai Pratap Guptaand and others reported in (2004) 8 SCC
[5] Learned Government advocate appearing on behalf of the State submits that P/6 is not a representation against the order of detention as contemplated under Section of 3 of the NSA,1980. The order of detention was communicated to the detenue on 29.04.2022. vide annexure R/2 which bears his signature, thereafter approval has been granted by the State Government on 04.05.2022 and the same day it was forwarded to the Central Government. The Advisory Board granted approval and order of confirmation was passed on 17.06.2022. The petitioner has sent notice through advocate on 04.06.2022 but no such acknowledgment has been filed to confirm whether this notice has not been served or not. This is not the notice sent under Section 8 of NSA, 1980 therefore, judgment passed in case of Sarabjeet Singh Mokha (supra) will not help to him.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
[6] The petitioner has wrongly contended that the order of detention was never communicated to detenue as well as his family members whereas the order of detention was served on same day to
- : 5 :-
detenue. Thereafter, it was sent to the SHO Khargone with direction to communicate to the detenue and information to the family members of the detenue. The detenue received the letter on the same day but no such representation was submitted to any of the authority as required under Section 8 of the NSA,1980. The detenue was also communicated the grounds of detention. The maternal grandfather vide annexure R/3 was also given information about the detention of detenue, therefore, the provision of Section 8 of NSA has duly been complied with but no such representation was filed by detenue. The signature in R/3 and R/4 has not been denied by the petitioner by way of rejoinder. In notice dated 04.06.2022, the petitioner in para 2, the petitioner has admitted that no representation could be submitted to the competent authority for want of supply of detention order as well as grounds for detention which is factual incorrect as grounds and detention order both had communicated. By this notice, the petitioner demanded the grounds for detention but no record of department, post of telegraph has been filed to indicate that this notice has been affected to the authorities. Therefore, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is not liable to be accepted that detention order is liable to be set aside as no decision has been taken upon so called representation dated 04.06.2022.