Azim, the owner of this shop had earlier refused to pay you all for drinks, when the local people came to intervene, you all hurled bombs indiscriminately with a view to kill them.
The incident clamped fear, frightfulness and insecurity in the minds of the public thereby affecting public order.
In reply to the petitioners assertions about the case of Kamal Singh, the Commissioner of Police stated, in paragraph 20 of his affidavit, that they are number relevant for the petitioners case.
On 21 3 1973, the Calcutta High Court rejected the Hebeas Corpus petition.
The grounds of detention were also served upon the petitioner on 1 10 1973.
The petitioner has attached a companyy of the order of the State Government on the case of Kamal Singh which shows that, although, Kamal Singh made numberrepresentation at all to the State Government under Section 8 of the Act, yet, he was released because the Advisory Board, after companysidering all the materials placed before it and after hearing Kamal Singh Tiger, in person, reported that in its opinion, numbersufficient cause for the detention of Kamal Singh existed.
This as still under companysideration when the petitioner filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to the Calcutta High Court questioning his detention.
On 27 11 1973, the petitioner made a second representation which was received by the State Government on 28 11 1973.
On 18 10 1973, a representation by the petitioner against his ,detention was received by the State Government.
The petitioner asserts that, on the very grounds on which he was detained, one Kamal Singh Tiger son of Gurmel Singh, who, like the petitioner, was alleged to be homeless in Calcutta, was detained but released after a companysideration of his case by the Advisory Board.
An order of preventive detention is also number a bar to prosecution.
The petitioner companyplains that the grounds of detention are vague, false, malafide, fanciful, number existent.
And if left free and unfettered you are likely to companytinue to disturb maintenance of public order by acting in a similar manner as aforesaid.
On 23 10 1973, the State, Government sent the petitioners case to the Advisory Board together with the grounds on which the detention was ordered, the representation against it made by the petitioner, and a report made by the Commissioner of Police under Sec.
On 22 10 1973, the detention order of the Commissioner of Police was approved by the State Government.
Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
The State Government companyfirmed the detention order on 8 11 1973 and its order was served on the petitioner in jail on 14 11 1973.
On 20 11 1973, Lal Mohan Jadav swore an affidavit, in the Court of Magistrate 1st Class at Alipore, stating that the petitioner Ram Bali Rajbhar did number participate in the attack on his shop on 5 9 1973 and that he did number mention his name in the First Information Report for that reason.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
On 5 11 1973, the Advisory Board, after examining.the case, gave its opinion to the State Government that there was sufficient cause for the petitioners detention.
322 of 1974.
N. Mukherjee and G. S. Chatterjee, for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BEG, J. The petitioner, Ram Bali Rajbhar, in this Habeas Corpus petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, seeks release from a detention ordered on 1 10 1973 by the Commissioner of Police, Calcutta, on the following grounds supplied on the same day to him On 5 9 1973 at about 17 40 hrs.,
you long with your associates Anwar Hossain of 18/2, Mominpur Road, Subal Das of Jhupri at Dock East Boundary Road, Calcutta, and others, all being armed with iron rods, lathis and bombs created a great disturbance of public order by hurling bombs at the tea stall of Lal Mohan Jadav at 19, Coal Berth, Calcutta, endangering the lives and safety of the stall owner and other nearby shop keepers, as he had refused to supply tea to you all, without payment.
you along with your associates Kali Das alias Tenia of Jhupri at Strand Road, Calcutta, Subed Ali of 5/2 Bhukailash Road and others, all being armed with iron rods, lathis and bombs, attacked a Watch Repairing Shop styled as M s. Babloo Watch Repairing Co., at 52, Circular Garden Reach Road, Calcutta, by hurling bombs and damaging furniture, watches, show cases of the said shop as Sk.
K. Chatterjee for the Petitioner.
On 7 9 1973 at about 20.05 hrs.,
The incident brought widespread panic in the locality, led to the closure of shops, suspension of vehicular traffic, thereby jeopardising the, maintenance of public order.
