65 of 1980 read with numberification No.
Their intention was to kill him because he did number participate in the strike in the companyliery.
The petitioners in both the cases were later on granted bail but the two criminal cases mentioned above are still going on.
Shri Alijan Mian is informed that he may make a representation in writing against the order under which he has been detained.
That on 8.11.82, at about 11.30 A.M. the subject alongwith Rambriksh Singh, Jadunandan Mahato and Chandra Shekhar Singh armed with bombs, gun, etc.
By an order dated 13th December, 1982 the Government approved the detentions order and informed the petitioners by letter dated 30th December, 1982 of the reference of their representation to the Advisory Board asking them to appear in person before the Board.
This adversely affected the public order and persons who were witnessing the cultural programme started running helter and skelter for their lives.
On the basis of that report the Government ordered detention of the petitioners upto 2nd December, 1983.
In the circumstances I am satisfied that if he is allowed to remain at large, he will indulge in activities prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.
For prevention of such activities, I companysider his detention necessary.
The petitioners appeared in person before the Advisory Board.
The object of the order of detention as indicated in the impugned order was to prevent the petitioners from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.
Alijan Mian, the petitioner in the first petition, is an employee of the Eastern Coalfields Limited working at Khudia Colliery as a dumper driver.
The petitioners instead of filing an appeal against the order of the High Court rejecting the writ petitions have chosen to file the present petitions under Art.
The two incidents on the basis of which the proceedings for preventive detention had been started were already the subject matter of criminal proceedings and in the circumstances the proceedings for preventive detention were absolutely uncalled for.
At the most the two incidents make out a case of law and order and number a case of public order.
The subject and his associates, with an intention to establish criminal supremacy and to kill him threw two bombs on him, resulting in grievous injury to Mussafir Singh.
One of his associates under the direction and guidance of the subject opened fire on Shri Chauhan resulting in grievous injury to him.
The Advisory Board eventually gave an opinion that the order of detention was justified.
This created great panic and alarm in the area and adversely affected the public order.
Jadunandan Sah, the petitioner in the second Petition, is also a dumper driver in Gopi Nathpur Colliery.
The subject is in jail and is likely to be released on bail.
Thus the subject acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order.
Under article 32 of the Constitution of India Miss R. Vaigai for the Petitioners.
32 of the Constitution.
Their stand was that they were active members of the union of workers of the companyliery, viz.,
As such the detention order was served in jail.
Hearing the cry, Mussafir Chauhan came there but seeing the subject and his associates engaged in the assault of his brother started running away for his life.
The grounds of detention supplied to the petitioners are in identical terms and they are as follows That on 15/16.10.82, at about 2.30 A.M. the subject alongwith Jadunandan Sah and 3 others went to Khudia Colliery and dragged one Shri Ram Briksh Chauhan who were witnessing a cultural programme and started assaulting him in presence of large gathering who were there to see the cultural programme.
the Colliery Mazdoor Sabha There were other unions in the said companylieries and due to some inter union rivalry a first information report against them was lodged by persons belonging to a rival union for an alleged offence under ss.
This refers to Nirsa P.S. Case No.
678 and 679 of 1983.
of Bihar, Patna and forwarded through the Superintendent of jail, Dhanbad as early as possible.
But Alijan Mian, the petitioner, threw another bomb and the informant was injured at his back and fell.
EXTRAORDINARY ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition Criminal Nos.
2 of s. 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 No.
The petitioners made representation against the order of detention in both the cases and the representations were on the same pattern.
The petitioners challenged the order of detention by filing writ petitions in the High Court but the same were dismissed in limine.
In the first information report it was alleged that on 8th November the informant was shot in his hand near his house by one Ram Bilas Singh and that at that time the petitioners were with the said Ram Bilas Singh.
208 of 1982 respectively.
went to the house of Ram Naresh Chauhan in Khudia Colliery.
The petitioner Alijan Mian was arrested on 8th November, 1982 while the petitioner Jadunandan Sah was arrested on 12th of November, 1982 in companynection with the aforesaid incidents.
189 and Nirsa P.S. Case No.
The said persons intended to kill him.
307/34 IPC and 27A of the Arms Act.
The companytentions raised on behalf of the petitioners are fourfold The petitioners were in jail when the detention orders were passed, when there was absolutely numberapprehension of breach of public order from them.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MISRA J. These two companynected petitions seek to challenge the orders of detention dated 2nd December, 1982 passed by the District Magistrate, Dhanbad in exercise of powers companyferred by subs.
Opening of gun fire in a thickly populated residental companyony of Khudia Colliery created great panic and alarm in the area and adversely affected public order.
The orders of detention were sequal to two incidents of 15/16th October and 8th November, 1982 giving rise to two criminal cases, Nirsa P.S. Case No.
Goburdhan for the Respondent.
208 dated 8.11.82 u s. 307/34 I.P.C. and s. 27 Arms Act.
Thus the subject acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.
In the first information report regarding the other.
His representation, if any, may be addressed to the Deputy Secretary, Home Spl.
3183/C dated 15th of October, 1982 of the Government of Bihar.
Department, Govt.
