TMI Blog1973 (2) TMI 131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... particulars having a bearing on the matter. The State Government considered this report and approved the detention order on August 26, 1971 when it also submitted to the Central Government the necessary report as required by Section 3(4) of the Act. The petitioner could, however, be arrested only on June 16, 1972 as, according to the return soon after the said order the detenu-petitioner was found to be absconding . The grounds on which the detention was ordered read: 1.On 20-4-71 at 02.00 hrs. you and your associates being armed with daggers, iron rods, bombs etc., trespassed into Shalimar Yard by scaling over the boundary wall and started looting railway materials stacked in front of D. S. P. Store, Shalimar. When resisted by the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest. On June 29, 1972 the State Government received a representation from the petitioner which was considered and rejected on July 3, 1972. On July 5, 1972 the State Government placed the petitioner's case before the Advisory Board as required by Section 10 of the Act. The Board submitted its report on August 17, 1972 expressing its opinion that there was sufficient cause for the petitioner's detention. On August 26, 1972 the State Government confirmed the detention order as required by Section 12(1) of the Act and duly communicated its decision to the petitioner. 2. Shri V. C. Parashar, learned Counsel appearing as amicus curiae to assist this Court, submitted in the first instance that the gap of about 10 months between the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction as courts. In terms, therefore, these sections may not be attracted. But even assuming it is permissible to have resort to such procedure the mere omission to do so could not, in our opinion, render the order of detention either illegal or mala fide as the suggestion connoted. The petitioner's detention cannot, therefore, be considered illegal on this ground. 4. The next point raised by Shri Parashar questioned the relevance of ground No. 1. According to the counsel this ground only suggests commission of an ordinary offence of theft, which could legitimately form the subject of a regular criminal trial in the ordinary criminal courts. He contended that it does not raise a problem of public order but only an ordinary law and or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... munity than a simple case of. stealing private or even public property. It is, in our opinion, misleading to equate such acts of robbery with the common cases of ordinary theft for the purpose of determining the applicability of Section 3 of the Act. Difference between an ordinary law and order problem and that of public order has been explained by this Court on several occasions and the legal position is by now fairly crystallised. In Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar this Court dealt with the question at length and illustrated the difference by fictionally drawing three concentric circles, the largest representing law and order, the next representing public order and the innermost representing security of State. Every violation or b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in an orderly civilised society is as a rule considered quite safe. In addition, such acts may also create a feeling of panic amongst the people resorting to the railway yards for loading and unloading wagons. It is futile to contend that the acts in question in their context are not grave and serious enough in their potentiality for disturbing the even tempo of the life of the community. In somewhat similar cases this Court has regarded similar acts as justifying the orders of detention. See Sk. Kader v. State of W. B. , Netaipada Saha v. State of W.B. and Kishori Mohan Bera (supra)). 5. The fact that the petitioner could be tried for the commission of offences disclosed in these grounds is also immaterial because his liability to be tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
