Madhya Pradesh High Court Criticizes State Government for Lapses in Detention Order Approval
Court Finds Lack of Application of Mind in NSA Order, Calls for Explanation from State Authorities
In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has sharply criticized both the District Magistrate of Shahdol and the State Government for significant lapses in the approval process of a detention order under the National Security Act, 1980. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Vivek Agarwal and Avanindra Kumar Singh, expressed its dismay over the procedural lapses that led to the wrongful detention of an individual due to a factual error that went unchecked.
The case in question involved a detention order issued by Dr. Kedar Singh, the District Magistrate of Shahdol, on September 9, 2024. The order erroneously referenced Neerajkant Dwivedi instead of Sushant Bais, the son of the appellant, Hiramani Bais. This mistake was acknowledged by Dr. Singh, who attributed it to simultaneous proceedings against both individuals.
The court highlighted the obligation under Section 3(4) of the National Security Act, 1980, which mandates the State Government to approve such detention orders within twelve days, ensuring that the grounds and particulars are thoroughly scrutinized. The judgment criticized the State Government for approving the order without due diligence or application of mind. The bench pointed out that the oversight demonstrated a grave lapse on the part of the authorities involved.
The court has demanded a personal affidavit from the Additional Chief Secretary, Home, explaining the failure to apply due diligence both by the District Magistrate and the State Government. Additionally, the court questioned why exemplary costs should not be imposed on the State Government for passing an illegal detention order due to these lapses.
The State has been ordered to produce the original file related to the approval process, and a subsequent hearing is scheduled for October 7, 2025. The presence of the Collector and the Superintendent of Police, Shahdol, has been dispensed with for the next hearing.
The judgment underscores the critical importance of adhering to statutory safeguards in detention procedures, particularly under laws as sensitive as the National Security Act. The court's ruling serves as a stern reminder to authorities to exercise their powers responsibly and diligently.
Bottom Line:
The order of detention passed under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980 must be approved by the State Government within twelve days, and such approval must demonstrate application of mind by the State Government. Failure to ensure accuracy of facts and proper scrutiny by both the District Magistrate and the State Government constitutes a serious lapse.
Statutory provision(s): National Security Act, 1980 - Sections 3(3), 3(4)
