Skip to content


Batul Chandra Ghosh Vs. the State of West Bengal - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectConstitution
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petn. No. 9 of 1972
Judge
Reported inAIR1974SC2285; 1974CriLJ1314; 1973(5)LC78(SC)
ActsWest Bengal (Prevention of Violent Activities) Act, 1970 - Sections 3(3); Constitution of India - Article 32
AppellantBatul Chandra Ghosh
RespondentThe State of West Bengal
Appellant Advocate S.C. Majumdar, Adv. and Amicus Curia
Respondent Advocate Dalip Sinha and ; G.S. Chatterjee, Advs. for Sukumar Basu and Co.
DispositionPetition dismissed
Cases Referred(Nishi Kanta Mondal v. State of West Bengal
Excerpt:
.....of section 33 would not be attracted in respect of evidence given by investigating officer. his evidence cannot be relied upon. - 2. on july 6, 1971, the district magistrate, 24 parganas issued the following order :whereas i am satisfied with respect of the person known as shri batul chandra ghosh @amar son of shri jitendra nath ghosh of subhashpalli p. sd/-illegible district magistrate 24-parganas 6-7-71. 6. the representations made by the petitioner were considered and rejected by the government as well as by the advisory board......constitution, the petitioner challenges the validity of his detention under the provisions of the west bengal (prevention of violent activities) act, 1070 (president's act no. 19 of 1970) (which will hereinafter be referred to as the act). he prays for a writ of habeas corpus requiring the respondent state of west bengal to release him from detention forthwith.2. on july 6, 1971, the district magistrate, 24 parganas issued the following order :-whereas i am satisfied with respect of the person known as shri batul chandra ghosh @ amar son of shri jitendra nath ghosh of subhashpalli p.s. bongaon dist. 24-parganas that with a view to prevention him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it is necessary so to do, i therefore, in exercise of the powers.....
Judgment:

Hegde, J.

1. In this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioner challenges the validity of his detention under the provisions of the West Bengal (Prevention of Violent Activities) Act, 1070 (President's Act No. 19 of 1970) (which will hereinafter be referred to as the Act). He prays for a writ of Habeas Corpus requiring the respondent State of West Bengal to release him from detention forthwith.

2. On July 6, 1971, the District Magistrate, 24 Parganas issued the following order :-

Whereas I am satisfied with respect of the person known as Shri Batul Chandra Ghosh @ Amar son of Shri Jitendra Nath Ghosh of Subhashpalli P.S. Bongaon Dist. 24-Parganas that with a view to prevention him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it is necessary so to do, I therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the West Bengal (Prevention of Violent Activities) Act, 1970 (President's Act No. 19 of 1970) make this order directing that the said Shri Batul Chandra Ghosh @ Amar be detained.

Given under my hand and seal of office.

Sd/- Illegible

District Magistrate,

24-Parganas

6-7-1971.

3. In pursuance of the said order, the petitioner was duly arrested on the same day. After his arrest he was served with grounds of detention. Those grounds read as follows :-

Government of West Bengal

Office of the District Magistrate, 24 Parganas.

No. 353/71 Dated 6-7-71

4. Grounds under Sub-section (1) of Section 8 of the West Bengal (Prevention of Violent) Activities Act, 1970 (President's Act No. 19 of 1970) for detention under Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (3) of Section 3 thereof.

To : Shri Batul Chandra Ghose @ Amar, son of Shri Jitendra Nath Ghose of subhaspalli, P.S. Bongaon, Dist. 24-Parganas.

5. You are being detained in pursuance of a detention order made in exercise of the power conferred by Sub-section (1) read with Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the West Bengal (Prevention of Violent Activities) Act, 1970 (President's Act No. 19 1970) on the ground that you have been acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order as evidenced by the particulars given below :

1. On 12-2-71 at about 01.00 hrs. you and some of your associates being aimed with daggers, bombs and other lethal weapons attacked the house of Shri Ranjan Kumar Baidya, s/o Late Dukhiram Baidya of Sakitgarh, P.S. Bongaon, over a party fraction and some of the inmates by hurling bombs. You, thereby, created a great panic in the locality & disturbed the public order.

2. On 23-2-71, between 01.45 hrs. and 02.15 hrs., Bongaon police on receipt of a secret information searched the house of Amulya Ghose of Subhaspali, Bongaon & recovered 3 high explosive bombs and some explosive materials from you and your associates' possession.

You are hereby informed that you may make a representation to the State Govt. against the detention order and that such representation shall be addressed to (the Assistant Secretary Home (special) Department Government of West Bengal, and forwarded through the superintendent of the jail in which you have been detained as early as possible. Under Section 10 of the West Bengal (Prevention of Violent Activities) Act, 1970 (President's Act 19 of 1970), your case shall be placed before the Advisory Board within thirty days from the date of your detention under the order.

You are also informed that under Section II of the West Bengal (Prevention of Violent Activities) Act, 1970 (President's Act No. 19 of 1970), the Advisory Board shall, if you desire to be heard, hear you in person and if you desire to be so heard by the Advisory Board, you should intimate such desire in your representation to the State Government.

Sd/-Illegible

District Magistrate

24-Parganas

6-7-71.

6. The representations made by the petitioner were considered and rejected by the Government as well as by the Advisory Board. Thereafter the petitioner moved this Court as mentioned earlier.

7. The order made in this case and the grounds served on the detenu are similar in all material respects to the order made and the grounds served on the detenu concerned in Writ Petition No. 7 of 1972 (Nishi Kanta Mondal v. State of West Bengal), decided by this Court on April 18, 1972. In that case this Court held the detention to be valid. Following the ratio of that decision, this writ petition is dismissed.

8. In this case Mr.S.C. Mazumdar acted as amicus curiae at our instance. The preparation of the case involved considerable work for him. The decision of this Court in Writ Petition No. 7 of 1972 was brought to our notice only after the arguments in this case were complete and the case was reserved for judgment. Under these circumstances, we think that the State should bear the expenses of defence. We fix the advocate's fee at Rs. 100/-. Issue necessary certificate in favour of Mr.S.C. Mazumdar.


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