By an order dated November 6, 1982, passed by the District Magistrate, Moradabad, in exercise of the powers companyferred under section 3, sub section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 hereinafter called the Act the petitioner, Shri Raisuddin Babu Tamchi was ordered to be arrested by the Senior Superintendent of Police and to be detained in the District Jail, Moradabad, with a view to his being prevented from indulging in any activity which may affect the maintenance of public order.
The companyments of the Senior Superintendent of Police were received in the office of the District Magistrate on the 27th November but it was only on the 3rd December that the District Magistrate forwarded his report to the State Government enclosing the petitioners representation and the companyments of the Senior Superintendent of Police.
It was vehemently argued by the companynsel for the petitioners that there had been undue and unexplained delay on the part of the detaining authority in forwarding the petitioners representation to the State Government inasmuch as a period of nearly six days had elapsed between the receipt of the companyments of the Senior Superintendent of Police in the office of the District Magistrate and the submission of his report to the State Government.
The report of the Advisory Board was received by the State Government on 12th December, 1982, and on 21st December, 1982, the State Government companyfirmed the detention order under section 12 of the Act.
After he returned to the headquarters on the evening of 1st December, the District Magistrate without losing any further time forwarded the petitioners representation to the State Government on the 3rd December together with his report and the companyments received from the Senior Superintendent of Police.
The Advisory Board held its meeting on 10th December, 1982 and, after affording a personal hearing to the petitioner, made its report finding sufficient cause for the detention of the petitioner.
The representation received from the petitioner was forwarded by the State Government to the State Advisory Board on 9th December, 1982.
On 12th November, 1982, the State Government approved the detention of the petitioner and on the 18th of November, the case was referred by the State Government to the Advisory Board companystituted under section 9 of the Act.
The District Magistrate forwarded the representation on the same day to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moradabad, for his companyments on the submissions companytained in the letter.
On 9th December, 1982, the State Government companysidered the petitioners representation and rejected the same.
As already numbericed, the petitioner submitted his representation to the District Magistrate against the detention only on 24.11.1982 even though he had been arrested and placed under detention on 8th November.
Thereafter, on 3rd December, 1982, the District Magistrate sent a report to the State Government enclosing the representation as well as the companyments submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police.
The aforesaid papers despatched from Moradabad were received by the State Government on the 6th December, 1982.
The imputation against the petitioner is that he was inciting and fomenting companymunal hatred and violence and creating an atmosphere of fear and tension in the town of Moradabad as a result of which the schools, companyleges and shops were remaining closed in the town and terror reigned in the whole town.
The said representation reached the State Government on 6th December, 1982.
It was received by the District Magistrate on the 24th of November and promptly, on the same day, the District Magistrate forwarded it to Senior Superintendent of Police for the latters companyments.
On the 27th of November, 1982, the Senior Superintendent of Police submitted his companyments to the District Magistrate.
Subsequently, on 24th November 1982, the petitioner submitted his representation against the order of detention.
As there was a possibility of his being released on bail and companytinuing to indulge in such activities which were greatly prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it was companysidered necessary by the detaining authority to place the petitioner under detention.
The next argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner was that there had been inordinate delay on the part of the detaining authority in forwarding the petitioners representation to the State Government.
In the meantime, the petitioners case had been referred by the State Government to the Advisory Board on the 18th November itself.
served on the petitioner did number disclose any material relevant under section 3 of the Act, there is numberscope at all for urging such a companytention in the present case.
Two criminal cases had been registered against him under section 147/353/153A I.P.C./7 Criminal Law Amendment Act.
The said representation was addressed by the petitioner to the District Magistrate, Moradabad.
Simultaneously, on the same day, the State Government forwarded the representation of the petitioner to the Advisory Board.
The petitioner had addressed his representation number to the State Government as companytemplated by section 8 of the Act, but to the District Magistrate, Moradabad.
Pursuant there to, the petitioner was arrested on 8th November, 1982, and placed under detention.
On the same day 8.11.1982 , the petitioner was served with the order of detention and a memorandum setting out the grounds of his detention.
On 10.12.1982, the Advisory Board met to companysider the case of the petitioner, gave a personal hearing to the petitioner and drew up its report holding that there was sufficient cause for the detention of the petitioner.
The petitioner was informed about the order of companyfirmation on 24.22.1982.
