Detained Merely On Surmises And Speculation: Madhya Pradesh HC Quashes NSA Detention Order, Grants ₹ 10K Cost
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed an order for detention of May 2, passed by the District Magistrate, Indore in the exercise of powers under section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980.
The Bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Amar Nath Kesharwani held that "It is clear from the grounds of detention that the applicant has been directed to be detained merely on surmises and speculation" while quashing the order.
As per the grounds of detention supplied to the Petitioner Ranveer @ Raman, there would be a possibility of creating a dispute in relation to political and communal matters after release from jail on bail.
There were four criminal cases registered against the Petitioner. One of the year 2016, the other of 2018 and two of the year 2022.
The Petitioner through Advocate Anshuman Shrivastava contended that the provisions of section 3(2) of the National Security Act,1980 should be exercised in a very cautious manner and after granting the fair opportunity to the aggrieved person. He contended that has not been convicted in any of the criminal cases and that out of four cases, two cases have been registered recently with the intention to initiate proceedings under National Security Act against him.
The Petitioner also contended that he is the only earning member in the family and at the time of detention he was already in jail, therefore, there was no need to pass an order of detention in the apprehension of disturbance of public order.
The Respondent through Government Advocate Valmik Sakargayen contended that all procedural requirements had been complied with while passing the order and that the Petitioner was actively indulged in criminal activities prejudicial to the public order and public safety therefore, the learned District Magistrate well within his power has rightly passed the order.
The Court noted that under section 3(2) of the National Security Act,1980, the Central Government and the State Government may if satisfied with respect to any person that with a view to preventing him from acting in a prejudicial and to maintaining a public order make an order directing such person be detained, therefore, the order section 3(2) of the National Security Act,1980 is liable to be passed in order to prevent any person if the authorities are satisfied that he may act in a manner prejudicial to maintenance of public order.
After referring to earlier judgments, the Court held that "All the criminal cases against the petitioner are not of such nature that it has ever affected or disturbed the society or the community which has further caused disturbance to the public order. The court has held that it is not justified to detain a person as he is likely to be released on bail".
The Court noted that the Petitioner was already under custody and the order of detention had been passed only on the basis of the strong possibility that he would be released on bail and thereafter would repeat the crime and that in similar circumstances, the Court had quashed such an order in an earlier case.
The Court ordered cost while quashing the order. "The Writ Petition is allowed with the cost of Rs. 10,000.00 payable to the petitioner", the Court ordered.