http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: FENDAN NAHA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF WEST BENGAL

DATE OF JUDGMENT03/05/1974

BENCH: RAY, A.N. (CJ) BENCH: RAY, A.N. (CJ) MATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN ALAGIRISWAMI, A. GOSWAMI, P.K. SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH

CITATION:  1975 AIR 1005            1975 SCC  (3)  30

ACT: The  Maintenance of Internal Security Act,  1971--Ss.  3(1), 13--Constitution  of India, Art. 22 (7)  (b)--Detention  for maximum  period--Validity of detention--Application of  mind as to the period of detention.

HEADNOTE: The  petitioner  challenged the order of  detention  on  the ground  that the autho. rities fixed the maximum  period  of detention  without applying their mind as to, the period  of detention. HELD  : (i) The order of detention does not suffer from  any constitutional  infirmity.   The  authorities  have  applied their mind while detaining for the maximum period  mentioned in  the statute.  This Court has held in ragu Shaw v.  State of West Bengal that the maximum period mentioned in  section 13  of the Act as amended by section 6(d) of the Defence  of India  Act,  1971, is a. constitutionally  valid  provision. [484B; 483G] Fagu Shaw v. The State of West Bengal, A.I.R. 1974 S.C.  613 followed..

JUDGMENT: ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition No. 2053 of 1973. Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India,  Shiv Pujan Singh, for the petitioner. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAY, C.J. The petitioner in a writ petition under Article 32 of’ the Constitution challenges the order of detention dated 15 March, 1973. The order is : ’in exercise of the powers conferred by  sub- section  (1) read with sub-section (2) of section 3  of  the Maintenance  of Internal Security Act "hereinafter  referred to as the Act" directing the petitioner to be detained". The petitioner challenges the order on the ground that it is the  duty  of the authority to fix the period  of  detention after   carefully  examining  the  circumstances   requiring detention.  The petitioner submits that the authorities haye

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

bodily lifted the section fixing the maximum period  without applying their mind as to the period of detention. This  Court  in Fagu Shaw etc. v. The State of  West  Bengal A.I.R. 1974 S.C. 613 held that the maximum period mentioned’ in  section 13 of the Act as amended by section 6(d) of  the Defence  of  India Act, 1971- is  a  constitutionally  valid provision. That  section states that the maximum period for  which  any person can be detained in pursuance- of any detention  which has been confirmed under section 12 shall be 12 months  from the date of detention or until the expiry of the Defence  of India Act whichever later. 484 This Court construed section 13 of the Act to be valid  with ,reference  to Article, 22(7)(b) of the  Constitution.   The maximum  period  under Article 22(7)(b) can  be  fixed  with reference  to the duration of an emergency.. The  expiry  of the Defence of India Act is dependent upon the revocation of emergency.  The duration of maximum period of detention with reference  to an event like the cessation of the  period  of emergency is not indefinite. The  order of detention in the present case does not  suffer from  any  constitutional  infirmity.The  authorities   have applied  their mind. The authorities have detained  for  the maximum period mentioned in the, statute.      The petition is dismissed.      K.B.N.    Petition dismissed. 485