0

Under the National Security Act, free movement in society is liable to be curbed out by passing the order of detention: HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE

The order of detention dated 02.05.2022 is unsustainable and is accordingly quashed is upheld by the HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE in the case of Ranveer @ Raman v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh through HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA.

FACTS OF THE CASE
The petitioner filed the present petition through his father Babu Anand Nekiya challenging the validity of the order of detention dated 02.05.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Indore in the exercise of powers under section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioner has been supplied the grounds for detention and according to which there would be a possibility of creating a dispute in relation to political and communal matters after release from jail on bail. Deputy Commissioner of Police Zone No.3, Indore vide letter dated 02.05.2022 requested District Magistrate, Indore for initiating detention proceedings against the petitioner on account of four criminal cases registered against him. Along with the aforesaid letter, the Deputy Commissioner of Police has given the list of five witnesses to be examined in this matter against the petitioner. After drawing proceedings under section 3 of the National Security Act,1980 the District Magistrate has passed an order of detention without prescribing the period of detention. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order the petitioner has approached this court by way of a writ petition challenging the detention order inter alia on the ground that the provisions of section 3(2) of the National Security Act,1980 should be exercised in a very cautious manner and after granting the fair opportunity to the aggrieved person.

Judgement
Under the National Security Act, a person is liable to be detained if there is an apprehension that with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State for maintenance of public order. It means his free movement in society is liable to be curbed out by passing the order of detention. But in the present case, the petitioner was already under custody and the order of detention has been passed only on the basis of the strong possibility that he would be released on bail and thereafter would repeat the crime. The order of detention dated 02.05.2022 is unsustainable and is accordingly quashed.

Click here to read the Judgement

JUDGEMENT WRITTEN BY SHREYA NIDHI

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat