STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS. versus SANASAM ONGBI AND ANR.

Citation: [1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 641 · Decided: 13-10-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

_. 
STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
SANASAM ONGBI AND ANR. 
OCTOBER 13, 1999 
[G.B. PATTANAIK, M. SRINIVASAN AND S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.] 
B 
National Security Act, 1980 : 
Section 3 ( 5 )-Expression "within seven days report the fact to the 
Central Government"-Scope and meaning of 
C 
Preventive Detention-Order passed by State Government-Obligation 
to send report to Central Government-Held requirement is State Government 
should send the report within seven days from passing of order of approval-It 
is not necessary that such report should reach the Central Government within D 
seven days. 
The detention order passed by the appellant-State under section 3(3) 
of the National Security Act, 1980 against the respondent was quashed by 
t.he Gauhati High Court on the ground that there has been an infraction 
of sub-section (5) of Section 3 inasmuch as the report of the State Govern-
E 
.. 
ment did not reach the Central Government within seven days of the date 
of approval. The State preferred an appeal before this Court. On the 
question whether the obligation of the State Government under Section 
3(5) of the Act can be said to have been fully discharged if the report in 
question is forwarded to the Central Government within the prescribed 
F 
period of seven days or the said report should reach the Central Govern-
ment within. the prescribed period of seven days: 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. The Division Bench of Gauhati High Court committed G 
error in coming to the conclusion that there has been an infraction of 
Section 3(5) of the Act as the report and the other documents did not reach 
the Central Government within the period of seven days as provided in 
ii-
sub-section (5) of Section 3 of the Act. The construction put forth by the 
High Court of the expression ''within seven days report the fact to the H 
641 
642 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1999] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A Central Government" is erroneous. [6'16-B; CJ 
B 
2. Under Section 3(5) of National Security Act, 1980, the statutory 
obligation on the State Government is to report the fact to the Central 
Government together with the grounds on which the order has been made 
within seven days of the date of approval when the order is made by any 
other authority than the State Government and within seven days of the 
date of the order when the order is made by the State Government itself. 
The language of Section 5 is not susceptible of the construction that the 
report itself should reach the Central Government within seven days 
prescribed under the said sub-section, which would be an impossible 
C burden in certain circumstances. The expression "report the fact to the 
Central Government" cannot be equated with the fact that the "report 
should reach the Central Government" within the period of seven days as 
provided in sub- section "(5) of Section 3. [643-F; G; H; 645-E; F] 
Vinayak Ramchandra Sakhalkar and Etc. Etc. v. D. Ramchandran, 
D Commissioner of Police, Thane and Ors. Etc., [1985] Criminal Law Journal 
(Vol. 91) 1257; Gum Charan Singh v. Superintendent, Central Jail, Bareilly & 
Ors., (1986) Allahabad Law Journal (Vol. 84) 1172 and Jivrajbhai Vrajlal 
Patel v. State of Gujarat & Ors., (1988) 1 Gujarat Law Reporter 17, over-
ruled. 
E 
Nizam Babamiya Bhatt v. A.S. Samra, Commr. of Police, Bombay, 
(1994) 1 Maharashtra Law Journal 6; Yogendra Singh v. State of Bihar & 
Ors., [1985] Vol. 91 Criminal Law Journal 889; Ullas Sahu & Etc. v. District 
Magistrate, Cuttack & Ors., [1988] Cr!. Law Journal (Vol. 94) 32, approved. 
F 
Sher Mohammed v. The State of West Bengal, AIR (1975) SC 2049, 
G 
distinguished. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION; Criminal Appeal No. 
345of1997. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.9.96 of the Gauhati High 
Court in C.R.H.C. No. 41 of 1996. 
Ms. S. Janani for the Appellants. 
H 
K.V. Vijayakumar for the Respondents. 
-
' 
STATE v. SANASAM ONGBI [PATTANAIK, J.] 
643 
! 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
A 
' ., 
PATTANAIK, J. This appeal by grant of special leave is directed 
· against the Judgment dated 20.9.96 of the Gauhati High Court in C.R.(HC) 
No. 41of1996. In a writ petition filed by a detenu, who was detained under 
Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, the High Court quashed the B 
order of detention on a conclusion that there has been an infraction of 
sub-section (5) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter 
referred to as 'the Act') inasmuch as the report of the State Gov
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.