TMI Blog1951 (12) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by PATANJALI SASTRI C.J.--This is a petition under article 32 of the Constitution praying for the release of the peti- tioner from his alleged unlawful detention. We accepted the petition and, at the conclusion of the hearing, ordered the petitioner to be released., We now proceed to give the reasons for our order. The petitioner was arrested and detained under an order dated 1st March, 1950, made by the District Magistrate, Amritsar, under section3(1) of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) and the grounds of detention were communicated to the petitioner as required by section7 of the Act on 15th March, 1950. The petitioner challenged the validity of the order on various grounds but, while the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 4 of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (Act IV of 1950), as amended by the Preventive Detention (Amendment) Act, 1951 (Act IV of 1951), the Governor of Punjab hereby directs that the said Makhan Singh Tarsikka be committed to the custody of the InspectorGeneral of Prisons, Punjab, and detained in any jail of the State till 31st March, 1952, subject to such conditions as to mainte- nance, discipline and punishment for breaches of discipline as have been specified by a general order or as contained in the Punjab Communist Detenu Rules, 1950. It will be seen that the terms of the order make it clear that it was intended to operate as a fresh order for the detention of the petitioner and this view is strengthened by the fact that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only after the Advisory Board, to which the case has been referred, reports that the detention is justified, the Government should determine what the period of deten- tion should be and not before. The fixing of the period of detention in the initial order itself in the present case was, therefore, contrary to the scheme of the Act and cannot be supported. The learned Advocate-General, however, urged that in view of the provision in section 11 (2) that if the Advisory Board reports that there is no sufficient cause for the detention, the person concerned would be released forth- with, the direction in the order dated 30th July, 1951, that the petitioner should be detained till 31st March, 1952, could be ignored as mere surplusage. We canno ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
