Skip to content


Latif HussaIn Vs. the State of Jammu and Kashmir - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petition No. 126 of 1970
Judge
Reported inAIR1971SC122; 1971CriLJ28; (1971)3SCC112
ActsJammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act, 1914 - Sections 3(3)
AppellantLatif Hussain
RespondentThe State of Jammu and Kashmir
Excerpt:
.....company carried on the business of supplying electricity to various cities under licences from the government. all the licences, except one for the supply of electricity to the city of lahore, were terminated or disposed of by 1942. soon after that, the provincial gov- ernment acquired the company's undertaking for the supply of electricity in lahore and part of the value for the acquisition remained due to be paid to the company after the listing and valuation of the assets. the company also possessed considerable assets not appertaining to the lahore electric supply undertaking and all its funds were invested in securities and shares, the income from which was the sole income after september 5, 1946. in its assessment to income-tax for the years 1948-49 and 1949-50, the company claimed..........was made by the district magistrate on november 6, 1969. under section 3(3) of the jammu and kashmir preventive detention act this order had to be approved by the government within 20 days. this provision does not depend for its operation on1 the arrest and detention of the person ordered to be detained. merely because the petitioner could only be arrested on november 21, 1969 did not extend the period within which the order of detention made by the district magistrate was required by the statute to be approved by the government in order to extend the life of the order beyond 20 days. the order of detention is not illegal and the petitioner's detention is in full accord with the procedure established by law.5. this petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.
Judgment:

I.D. Dua, J.

1. Latif Hussain Malik, petitioner, forwarded his application dated March 10, 1970 from Central Jail, Jammu seeking his production in this Court for filing an application for a writ of habeas corpus. According to him, he was arrested on September 21, 1969. This application was treated as an application for writ of habeas corpus and on April 9, 1970 a rule nisi was issued.

2. According to the return the petitioner was detained on November 21, 1969 pursuant to an order dated November 6, 1969 with a view to preventing him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the security of the State. He was informed that it was against public interest to disclose to him the grounds of his detention. The State Government confirmed the order of detention on November 11, 1969.

3. The only contention raised on his behalf is that the order of confirmation by the Government was made before the petitioner's arrest and detention and that this rendered his custody illegal.

4. I am unable to sustain this contention. The order of detention was made by the District Magistrate on November 6, 1969. Under Section 3(3) of the Jammu and Kashmir Preventive Detention Act this order had to be approved by the Government within 20 days. This provision does not depend for its operation on1 the arrest and detention of the person ordered to be detained. Merely because the petitioner could only be arrested on November 21, 1969 did not extend the period within which the order of detention made by the District Magistrate was required by the statute to be approved by the Government in order to extend the life of the order beyond 20 days. The order of detention is not illegal and the petitioner's detention is in full accord with the procedure established by law.

5. This petition accordingly fails and is dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //