P L D 1969 Dacca 382 (PLP)

ABDUL MOUDUD, J.‑In this case a Rule was issued calling upon the opposite‑parties to show cause why the detenu who is alleged to be illegally and improperly detained at the Dacca Central Jail should not be brought before this Court and be dealt with in accordance with law with a direction that a copy of this rule should be served on the Advocate‑General. It may be mentioned here that this case also came up for hearing on 10‑11‑67 when Mr. S. M. Abbas for the state submitted that there was every chance of the detention order being with. drawn by the Government and he prayed for a fortnight's adjournment for effecting such withdrawal. It was averred on behalf of the detenu Sk. Fazlul Haq alias Mani that this detenu is a businessman doing the same independently and that while he was a student of University of Dacca he took active part In the several students movements ventilating their various grievances. On 18‑9‑66 while the detenu was passing by a rickshaw in front of Hotel Shahbagh he was detained by a police party and an order purporting to be under the signature of the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca, dated 1‑6‑66 under Rule 32(1)(b) of the Defence of Pakistan Rules, 1965, was served on him and thereafter he was taken to the Central Jail, Dacca where he is being detained. The said order was for a period of three months and thereafter order on the self‑same grounds for further period of three months each were served on the detenu. The current and final order is dated 12‑9‑

67. It was a mere stereotyped order in which the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca put his signature without applying his mind as to the actual necessity of the detention order. This detenu was never concerned with any activities prejudicial to the security or public safety, public interest and maintenance of public order, and the maintenance of peaceful condition in the country which could warrant his arrest under the Rule. This detenu did not avoid apprehension and the first order that was clamped upon him was incorrect as to the particulars of the detenu and hence this detenu bad no knowledge thereof. The impugned order was passed without complying with the provisions of the rules and without applying any mind for the purpose of satisfaction as to the materials justifying the order clamped upon the detenu. Mr. M. K. Anwar, Deputy Commissioner, Dacca has sworn to the counter‑affidavit on behalf of the opposite‑parties and he has averred amongst others, that be had made the detention order after being fully satisfied as to the incriminating activities and proclivities of this detenu. He made the order on 1‑6‑66 but it could not be served upon the detenu as he was absconding. Consequently a Notification No. 737/C dated 13‑7‑66, was made directing the subject to appear before him within 15 days from the date of notification in the official Gazette. The detenu was still absconding and evading arrest and ultimately Ramna P. S. Case No. 36 dated 6‑8‑66 under Rule 32, Defence of Pakistan Rules was started against him for non‑compliance of the order. On 18‑9‑66 this detenu was traced out at night and the detention order was served on him, by delivering copy of the same to him on the spot and thereafter he has been kept detained in the Dacca Central Jail. This detenu had been twice committed to jail custody in the year 1964 for his subversive activities. He was also an under‑trial prisoner in Ramna P.S. Case Nos. 89 (3) 64 in connection with Convocation demonstrations and violence. On 13‑5‑66, this detenu addressed a public meeting in the Outer Stadium and called upon the audience to a vigorous move ment against the Government established by law and brought the same to hatred and contempt. He again attended a meeting on 15‑5‑66. in the office of the Awami League and it was decided in that meeting to observe Hartal by holding public meeting and taking out processions with a view to keeping up the tempo of the agitation. On 23‑5‑66 this detenu attended another meeting and addressed the same for observing protest day on 7‑6‑

66. On 7‑6‑66 this detenu and others indulged in lawlessness and created chaos and confusion in and around the town of Dacca. Traffic was dislocated, moving vehicles were stopped and set on fire and trains were derailed and services disrupted. On 13‑7‑66 this detenu took part in a secret meeting where it was decided to create trouble in the Independence Day. On 6‑8‑66 at the Instance of the detenu objectionable Pamphlets were found posted in the Tejgaon Industrial area. The following is the first detention order dated 1‑6‑66 against this detenu: ‑ "Government of East Pakistan Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca. No. 588‑C. Dated 1‑6‑

66. Whereas Mr. Fazlul Haq alias Nani s/o late Nurul Haque of Tongipara, P. S. Gopalganj, District Faridpur and of 91, Arambagh P. S. Ramna Dacca is reported to have acted and likely to act in a manner prejudicial to the public safety and the maintenance of public order, the maintenance of peaceful condi tion in the country, the maintenance of essential supplies and services And whereas I, P. S. Nazir, The Deputy Commissioner of Dacca, am satisfied that with a view to preventing the said Mr. Fazlul Huq alias Nani from acting in any manner prejudicial to the public safety and the maintenance of public order the maintenance of peaceful conditions in the country and main tenance of essential supplies and service, it is necessary to make the following order: ‑ Now, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by clause (b) of sub‑rule (I) of rule 32 of the Defence of Pakistan Rules, 1965, delegated to me by the Government of East Pakistan Notification No. 115 Poll (II), dated 13‑9‑65, I, P. A. Nazir, Deputy Commissioner, Dacca District do hereby direct: ‑ (a) that the said Mr. Fazlul Haq alias Nani shall be detained for a period of 3 (three) months from the date of service of this order: (b) that subject to the provisions of clause (a) graph the said person shall be detained in General Jail. (Sd.) (Illegible) Deputy Commissioner, District Dacca, 1‑6‑66." Mr. Serajul Haq, the learned Advocate for the detenu submitted, before, is, that in this order the name of this detenu was not correctly stated, his father was mentioned "late though he is still alive and his Dacca address was given as No. 91 instead of 92 of Arambagh, P. S. Ramna Dacca. On a careful reading of this order we find, no doubt that the word Sheikh" was omitted against the name of this detenu and of his father who was also described as "late" but such non‑mention of mere sun‑names only where the names of the detenu and his father were correctly mentioned would not be taken as mis leading. Again the mentioning of the present address as No. 91 instead of 92 which are adjacent premises could not be taken as thoroughly misleading with a view to make this detenu untraceable. Orders against this detenu were issued periodically every one in force for a period of three months, and the tenor of such orders was that every one of them was a fresh order though issuance was in continuance of the previous one and Mr. S. Huq could not find any fault with any one. It may be mentioned that in the second order dated 15‑12‑E6 served on the deponent while he was in Dacca Central Jail his name as well the name of his father were correctly mentioned and it was specifically stated in paragraph 2 of the order that "having further considered the materials against the said person . . . . . ' The Deputy Commissioner, of Dacca was satisfied for making the preventive order. In this counter‑affidavit dated 28‑4‑67 Mr. M. K. Anwar, the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca has listed in paragraph 9 the incriminating proclivities of this detenu. In (1) it is stated that be was committed to jail custody in the year 1964 for his subversive activities and that he was an under trial prisoner in Ramna P. S. Case Nos. 89(3) 64 and 92(3)

64. Both the cases arose out of demonstrations during con vocation time in that year and it was admitted that in the first case this detenu has already been convicted and sentenced by the trial Court, and he has preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court where it is pending. The Second Case is still pending before the trying Magistrate. As regards his speeches delivered on 13‑5‑66 in the public meeting in the outer stadium the opposition produced materials that is verbatim speech of the detenu in the vernacular language. On a careful perusal of the same there was no doubt in our minds that there are aspersions and insinuations against the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and also against the elected Head of the State and that such aspersions and insinuations were made deliberately with a view to bring the Constitution of the country as well as the Head of the Sate to hatred and contempt. Having regard to the force of the aspersions and insinuations made in his speeches on that date and the subsequent activities of this detenu we feel that his activities as well as proclivities are sufficient to satisfy a reasonsable person as to the requirements for clamping an order under Rule 32(1) (b) of the Defence of Pakistan Rules. Accordingly, we find that the Deputy Commissioner of Dacca was competent in making the impugned order and that it cannot be assailed. In the result, the rule is discharged. BAQUER, J.‑I agree. A. E. Rule discharged.