Suresh Batham vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2851 MP

                                        1                    WP 5088-2021

             THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          WP 5088-2021
              (Suresh Batham Vs. State of M.P. & ors. )
Gwalior Dt. 30.06.2021

      Shri Vivek Bhargava, learned counsel for petitioner.

      Shri MPS Raghuvanshi, learned Additional Advocate General for

respondent/State,

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

Present petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution seeks

quashment of order of preventive detention dated 06.02.2021 vide P/1

passed by District Magistrate, Gwalior detaining the petitioner for a

period of three months by invoking Section 3 of National Security Act.

Two grounds have been raised in support of aforesaid challenge.

The first being that the order of prevantive detention was passed on

06.02.2021 when the petitioner was already in custody in connection with

offence punishable u/Ss. 307, 353, 332, 333, 336, 294, 506, 147, 148, 149

registered as crime No. 49/21 Police Station Kampoo District Gwalior in

regard to which he was arrested as early as on 22.01.2021. In this

background the ground of non-application of mind on the part of District

Magistrate is alleged since neither the impunged order nor short reply

filed by the State discloses any material indicating that District

Magistrate, Gwalior knew that the petitioner was already in custody and

yet for special reasons to be recorded, the order of preventive detention

was required. The second ground is that the grounds of detention were

communicated with delay thereby violating the provisions of Section 8 of 2 WP 5088-2021

National Security Act.

Learned counsel for petitioner relied upon the decision of this

Court passed on 02.02.2021 in WP 19548/20 (Awadhesh Sharma Vs.

State of M.P. & ors.) vide P/4 where the order of preventive detention

was quashed on the ground of non-application of mind and the delayed

communication of grounds of detention.

As regards first ground that petitioner being in custody when the

impugned order was passed, the State does not dispute this fact. The State

has also not produced any material to show that the District Magistrate,

Gwalior was compelled by reasons to be recorded in writing that despite

the petitioner being in custody, the passing of order of preventive

detention was necessary. Thus the view taken by this Court in WP

19548/20 decided on 02.02.2021 vide P/4 squarely applies to the facts and

circumstances of the present case.

In view of the fact that this petition succeed on the above said

singular ground, this Court refrains from entering into merits of other

grounds.

Applying the order dated 02.02.2021 passed in WP 19548/20 to the

present case, the present petition also deserves to be and is allowed to the

following extent:

(1) The impugned order dated 06.02.2021 vide P/1 passed by

District Magistrate Gwalior is quashed.

(2) It appears that District Magistrates while considering the 3 WP 5088-2021

cases of National Secutrity Act are prompt in invoking

jurisdiction of National Security Act but lack procedural

compliance, therefore, many cases which are otherwise good

on merits but do not stand to judicial scrutiny. Since the

matter pertains to personal liberty of an individual,

therefore, strict compliance of procedure is required but this

is the cause of concern becuase any audacious act of a

person may have disturbed the even tempo of life but

because of utter haste under which proceedings are initiated,

certain mandatory compliances are ignored.

(3) Therefore, this Court issued certain directions in WP

1118/21 (Anshul Jain Vs. State of M.P.) vide order dated

01.04.2021 and recently Division Bench at Indore in WP

9792/21 (Yatindra Verma Vs. Home Department & ors.)

vide order dated 24.06.2021 directed the State Authorities

to ensure compliances and in both the orders copies of order

were directed to be sent to the Chief Secretary, Govt. of M.P.

and Principal Secretary, Law and Legislative Affairs and

Home Department.

(4) In addition to what directed by the Division Benches in

other cases, this Court again reiterates the spirit with an

expectation that a training module (even through online

mode also) be conceptualized and booklet of "do's and 4 WP 5088-2021

dont's" pertaining to National Security Act cases be

prepared for circulation to all District Magistrates of State

so that they may go through it while deciding the case of

National Secutiry Act.

(5) The said booklet must contain copy of relevant

judgments of Supreme Cout as well as M.P. High Court on

specific subject for instant reference of the Authority. In

preparation of booklet, co-operation of Department of Law

and Legislative Affairs, Administrative Academy Bhopal

and State Judicial Academy Jabalpur can be taken.

(6) Copy of this order be sent to Chief Secretary, State of

M.P., Principal Secretary, Home and Principal Secretary,

Law and Legislative Affairs, Govt. of M.P. for compliance

of this order.

With these directions, this petition stands allowed.

        (Sheel Nagu)                   (Anand Pathak)
           Judge                           Judge
YOGENDR
   ojha

A OJHA
2021.07.01
11:00:38
+05'30'