High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Ram Narayan v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. (Home) U.P. At Lkw. & Ors. - HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. 41164 of 2004  RD-AH 1066 (13 April 2005)
Case is called out. No one is present on behalf of the petitioner although the name of Shri B.K. Tripathi is shown in the cause list as counsel for the petitioner. That apart despite time having been granted on different dates rejoinder to the counter affidavits has also not been filed.
We have gone through the writ petition, counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents and also the order of detention and the grounds of detention, which are enclosed as Annexure 5 to the writ petition.
It appears that the petitioner is detained by the order of the District Magistrate, Maharajganj dated 20.4.2004 under the provisions of Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act') on account of his involvement in Case Crime No.695 of 2003, under Section 2/5 of the Explosive Substance Act, Police Station Nautanwa, District Maharajganj.
The prejudicial activities of the petitioner, which led to his detention under the provisions of the Act, briefly stated, are that he along with his associates was active in supplying explosive substance to Maowadi activists on Indo Nepal Border. It is alleged that the petitioner and his associates, in a planned manner and on fictitious name, booked Sulphur in the name of Nausader and its delivery was taken on 14.11.2003 from Roshan Transport, Nautanwa from where it was to be transported on bi-cycle for handing over to Maoists. However, the police intercepted and recovered the Sulphur, which is being used for preparing explosive substance. The petitioner was thereafter arrested by the police on 9.12.2004 at 5.30 am along with his associates and from their possession Rs.23,000/- of Nepali currency and Rs.1900/- of Indian currency, which they had got for the supply of Sulphur to Maoists was recovered. On the information furnished by the petitioner and his associates, Ghanshyam Gupta and Pradeep Jaiswal were also arrested along with the objectionable literatures relating to Maowadi activities and from their possession also recovery was made. Case Crime No.695 of 2003 and Case Crime No.4 of 2004 were registered wherein the police after necessary investigation has submitted charge sheet under Section 2/5 of the Explosive Act and under Section 125, 127, 419, 420, 467, 468 & 120-B of the IPC. The District Magistrate having been satisfied on the material placed before him that the activities of the petitioner are prejudicial to the maintenance of security of the State, passed the impugned order of detention. The State Government thereafter also confirmed the detention for a period of one year.
From a perusal of the impugned order of detention and the grounds of detention and also the statements made in the counter affidavit, we are of the view, that the prescription of law has fully been complied with while passing the impugned order of detention and the alleged activities of the petitioner are prejudicial to the maintenance of security of the State and thus, the order of detention is justified.
In the result, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed but without any order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.