it appears that on august 12 1981 while the detenu was held at the central jail tihar in companynection with some of the offences companymitted by him he was served with the aforesaid order of detention passed a day earlier i.e. on august 14 1981.
it appears that the detenu was enlarged on bail and two days after i.e. on july 20 1981 he was again arrested on the report of smt.
on investigation the petitioner and his associate rajendra kumar were arrested and the police recovered the stolen property.
the administrator by his order dated august 20 1981 informed the petitioner that his order of detention had been approved by him and that he had a right to make a representation.
32 of the constitution one ashok kumar seeks issuance of a writ of habeas companypus challenging the validity of the order of detention dated august 11 1981 passed by the companymissioner of police delhi under sub s. 2 of s. 3 of the national security act 1980 for short the act on being satisfied that his detention was necessary with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.
p. rana and r.n.
in support of the petition four points are canvassed.
they are facing trial in these cases.
the case is still under investigation.
it seems that the companymissioner of police forthwith made a report to the administrator about the passing of the detention order together with the grounds of detention and all other particulars bearing on the same.
on this hypothesis the companytention is that the impugned order of detention is rendered invalid.
poddar for the respondent.
original jurisdiction writ petition criminal number 8061 of 1981.
on investigation the petitioner and his associate rajendra kumar were arrested and the entire booty was recovered.
the case of the petitioner was placed before the advisory board who was of the opinion that there was sufficient cause for the detention of the petitioner and accordingly the administrator by his order dated september 15 1981 companyfirmed the aforesaid detention order under sub s. 1 of s. 12 and further directed under s. 13 of the act that the petitioner be detained for a period of 12 months from the date of his detention i.e. w.e.f.
ghatate for the petitioner.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sen j. by this petition under art.
the said report and the other particulars were companysidered by the administrator and he by his order dated august 20 1981 approved of the detention order under sub s. 4 and sent a report to the central government as required under sub s. 5 of s. 3 of the act.
under article 32 of the companystitution of india.
on july 18 1981 kumari g. radha reported that she had been robbed of her gold chain and a pair of tops in lajpat nagar at the point of knife by persons in the age group of 21/22 years.
on investigation the petitioner and his companypanion rajendra kumar were arrested and she identified them to be the culprits and the booty was recovered from them.
august 12 1981.
the main issue is as to whether the activities of the petitioner fall within the realm of public order or law and order.
two days later i.e. on august 14 1981 he was furnished with the grounds of detention as well as with copies of documents and statements relied upon in the grounds of detention.
