LexSURYA PRAKASH SHARMA versus STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A SURYA PRAKASH SHARMA v. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. AUGUST 9, 1994 B [P.B. SAWANT AND M.K. MUKHERJEE, JJ.] National Security Act, 198(}-Section 3(3)-0rder of detention unde1"--Validity of-Solitmy incident of murder-Detenue in judicial custody on date of making of order-Wliether and in what circumstances an order for C preventive detention can be passed against a person who is already in custody. Pursuant to an order made under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980 the detenue was detained with a view of preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The main allegation in the grounds of detention served upon the detenue D is that ihe detenue alongwith his three colleagues brutally committed the murder of one person in a thickly populated area by causing bullet injuries on his person. A panic was created amongst the residents and normal life was completely disturbed. On the date of making of the order the detenue was in judicial custody. E F Assailing the validity of the order of detention, the petitioner alleged in the writ petition that having regard to the fact that the detenue was in judicial custody in connection with the case instituted over the murder, there was no, nor could there be any, apprehension in the mind of the detaining authority that he would be indulging in any prejudicial activity, and therefore, the satisfaction of the detaining authority to pass the ord_er was not proper . . Allowing the writ petition, this Court HELD : Though the grounds of detention indicate the detaining G authority's awareness of the fact that the detenue was in judicial custody at the time of making the order of detention, the detaining authority has not brought on record any cogent material nor furnished any cogent ground in support of the averment made in grounds of detention that if the detenue is released on bail 'he may again indulge in serious offences H causing threat to public order'. The satisfaction of the detaining authority 486 S.P. SHARMA v. STATE [MUKHERJEE, J.] 487 that the detenue might indulge in serious offences causing threat to public A order, solely on the_basis of a solitary murder, cannot be said to be proper and justified. [ 489-D, E) Dhanne11dra Suga11cha11d C/1elawat v. U11io11 of India, AIR (1990) SC 1196 and Rameshwar Shaw v. District Magistrate, (1964) 4 SCR 921, fol- B lowed. CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 117 of 1994. (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.) D.K. Garg and Yatendra Sharma for the Petitioner. N.M. Ghatate and A.S. Pundir for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.K. MUKHERJEE, J. We heard this writ petition on July 26, 1994 and on conclusion of the hearing passed the following order : c D "Reasons to be recorded separately . We allow the Writ Petition and direct that the detenue Surya Prakash Sharma be released E forthwith unless wanted in some other case." We now recount the reasons for the above order. Pursuant to an order made by the District Magistrate, Meerut, on February 1, 1994 under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980, Surya Prakash Sharma, the detenu, was detained with a view to preventing F him from actiog in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Assailiog the validity of the above order the petitioner filed this writ petition. The main allegation in the grounds of detention served upon the detenu is that on January 1, 1994 he along with his three colleagues brutally G committed the murder of one Anil Kumar Jain io a thickly populated area of Meerut city by causing bullet injuries on his person. It is further alleged that due to the gruesome murder committed by the_ detenu and his col- leagues a panic was created amongst the residents of Meerut and the normal life was completely disturbed and people started thinking themsel- H 488 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994) SUPP. 2 S.C.R. A ves unsafe. It is lastly stated in the grounds of detention : B c "Although the aforesaid Shri Surya Prakash Sharma s/o Sukh Lal is in Judicial custody with effect from 22.1.1994, however, he has been trying to be released on bail. He moved an application for bail on 24.1.1994 before the District and Sessions Judge, Meerut and the application for bail has been fixed for hearing on 2.2.1994. If the aforesaid Shri Surya Prakash is released on bail he may again indulge in serious o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.