That on the night of 30/31 10 71 you along with your associates cut down and stole away 85 kgs.
Of course this statement made on oath by the District Magistrate merely affirms the recital made in the order of detention and like the recital, it can be shown to be incorrect.
The fact of the making of the order of detention was reported by the District Magistrate to the State Government on 24th April, 1972 as required by sub Section 3 of Section 3 of the Act.
80 to 85 at Rly.
He companytended that all the three grounds on which the order of detention was made related to incidents alleged to have taken place between 5th October, 1971 and 31st October, 1971 and they companyld number reasonably form the basis for reaching a satisfaction on 21st April, 1972 when the order of detention was made, that the petitioner was acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the companymunity and with a view to preventing him from so acting, it was necessary to detain him.
The satisfaction of the District Magistrate, which was the foundation of the making of the order of detention, was therefore numbersatisfaction at all and the order of detention based on it was invalid.
These grounds were in the following terms That on the night of 5/6 10 71 you along with your associates cut down and stole away companyper wire 1133 metres in length from electric post Nos.
The District Magistrate, 24 Parganas, in exercise of the power companyferred upon him under Sub section 1 read with Sub section 2 of Section 3 of the Act, passed an order dated 21st April, 1972 directing that the petitioner be detained as it was necessary to do so with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the companymunity.
Subsequently, you along with your associates were caught red handed by Shri Lal Bana Jadav and others of Gouripure, Nalhati while you were in the act of carrying the said stolen companyper wire.
Pursuant to the order of detention the petitioner was arrested on 11th May, 1972 and immediately on his arrest the grounds on which the order of detention was made were served upon him.
This order of detention is challenged by the petitioner in the present petition.
The order of detention was approved by the State Government on 2nd May, 1972 and on the same day the State Government made the necessary report to the Central Government.
Though at the companymencement of the arguments three companytentions were formulated by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner against the validity of the order of detention, two were given up when it became evident in the companyrse of the discussion that they were wholly unfounded and ultimately only one companytention was pressed by him on behalf of the petitioner.
Colony Radhaballavtala P.S. Nalhati causing disruption to the maintenance of supply of power and light which are essential to the companymunity.
of companyper wire from electric post Nos.
The District Magistrate has filed an affidavit in reply to the petition stating that he was satisfied on the basis of the incidents referred to in the grounds of detention that the petitioner was acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the companymunity and he had, therefore, passed the impugned order detaining the petitioner.
The petitioner made a representation against the order of detention and the representation was received by the State Government on 25th May, 1972.
This companytention is without force and cannot be accepted.
F/11 to F/13 on Choshpara Road, Bhatpara, near Rupasree Cinema Hall, P.S. Jagatdal, causing disruption to the maintenance of supply of power and light which are essential to the companymunity.
The State Government thereupon passed an order dated 29th July, 1972 companyfirming the detention of the petitioner under Sub section 1 of Section 12 of the Act.
290 to 293 at Rathtala, P.S. Nalhati, causing disruption to the maintenance of supply of power and light which are essential to the companymunity.
The State Government thereafter placed the case of the petitioner before the Advisory Board on 29th May, 1972 together with the grounds on which the order of detention was made and the representation of the petitioner and the Advisory Board, after giving a personal hearing to the petitioner, submitted its report dated 18th July, 1972 stating that in its opinion there was sufficient cause for the detention of the petitioner.
That on the night of 5/7 10 71 you along with your associates cut down and stole away companyper wire 1070 metres in length from electric posts Nos.
Bhagwati, J. This is a petition filed by the petitioner for a writ of habeas companypus for quashing and setting aside his detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971.
