IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.798 of 2010 SAIMPU SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 08. 23.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 4 and 5, as well as Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Petitioner prayer is for quashing the order, contained in Memo No. 647, dated 01.05.2010, whereby the District Magistrate, Begusarai has detained the petitioner under section 12 (2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981. He has also prayed for quashing the order, contained in Memo No. 4867, dated 14.06.2010, issued by the Under Secretary, Government of Bihar, Home (Police), conforming the order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Begusarai and the petitioner has been directed to be detained in custody till 30.04.2011. The District Magistrate, Begusarai, receiving the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai, contained in Memo No. 2474, dated 05.04.2010 and finding that there are sufficient grounds for detaining the petitioner under the 2 provisions of Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981, passed order of detention, dated 01.05.2010, contained in Memo No. 647. While passing the Order under section 12 (2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981, the District Magistrate considered the long criminal history of the petitioner. Most of them relating to Extortion, Arms Act and other serious offences. The recent cases, which have been instituted against the petitioner for serious offences, were considered as good grounds for his detention. The petitioner had been granted bail in most of the cases, except in Cheria Bariarpur P. S. Case No. 11 of 2010 and considering that there were possibilities for his moving for bail in connection with this case also, the District Magistrate considered it proper to detain him. The District Magistrate in his detention order has stated that in case the petitioner is released, it will have an adverse effect on the law and public order as such there are sufficient grounds to detain the petitioner under the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981. The order of detention was communicated to the petitioner on 21.05.2010 and the petitioner made his representation before the authority, as provided 3 under the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981. The detention order was approved within 15 days of the issuance of the detention Order and thereafter as per the provisions under section 19 of the Act, the petitioner was produced before the Advisory Board within the time provided under the Act. The Advisory Board was of the opinion that sufficient grounds are present for detention order. Considering the recommendation of the opinion of the Advisory Board, by order dated 11.06.2010, the State Government confirmed the order of detention under section 21(2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981. The representation filed by the petitioner was also rejected and communicated to him. Counsel for the petitioner has taken a solitary ground for challenging the order of detention, i.e., while the petitioner is still behind the bar and not granted bail in one of the cases instituted against him, as such there was no good ground for passing an order of detention under section 12 (2) of the Act. On perusal of the counter affidavits, filed on behalf of the respondents, we do not find any illegality or impropriety in the procedure adopted by the respondents for passing an order of detention against 4 the petitioner and its confirmation by the State Government. Steps have been taken in accordance with law as provided under the Act. So far the grounds taken by the petitioner regarding his still being behind the bar in connection with one case, we do not find any merit in this ground as being an accused in this case, he must be making attempt for grant of bail in connection with this case. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of detention passed by the District Magistrate under section 12 (2) of the Act as well as confirmation by the State Government vide order dated 11.06.21010. This application is dismissed. SKM (Mridula Mishra, J.) (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)