9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Validity of detention order based on communication of grounds to an illiterate person, discharge in criminal proceedings before detention, absence of affidavit by District Magistrate, and validity of detention order based on satisfaction of detaining authority. Analysis: The judgment addresses three main grounds challenging the validity of the detention order. Firstly, it is argued that the illiterate petitioner was not communicated the grounds of detention. However, the court finds this argument lacking merit as the detenu's representation after service of the order indicates that he understood the grounds. Secondly, the petitioner's discharge in criminal proceedings before detention is raised as an issue. The court does not delve into the truth of this assertion, stating that the detention was likely due to the disruption caused by the detenu's activities, even if criminal prosecution was not pursued due to lack of evidence or witness cooperation. Regarding the absence of an affidavit by the District Magistrate, it is contended that the detention order cannot be sustained without it. The court distinguishes this case from a previous judgment by Krishna Iyer, J., emphasizing that the absence of the District Magistrate's affidavit is not fatal. The court highlights that the affidavit by a Senior Officer in the secretariat, who was involved in handling the case at the government level, suffices. The court dismisses the argument that the absence of the District Magistrate's affidavit renders the detention order invalid. In this case, the affidavit submitted by the Deputy Secretary (Home Department) is considered sufficient. The Deputy Secretary explained that the District Magistrate was occupied with urgent law and order matters, justifying his absence from swearing the affidavit. The court concludes that the detention order was made by the District Magistrate after being satisfied of the necessity to prevent the detenu from acting prejudicially. With no other grounds challenging the legality of the detention order, the petition is dismissed.
|
