CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2002) 12 AHC CK 0003

Hari Kishun Yadav (in Jail) vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 2 December 2002 · Citation: (2003) 1 ACR 224

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rakesh Tiwari, J · M. Katju, J
CASE NUMBER
Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 15322 of 2002

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 362 words

M. Katju, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

This writ petition has been filed against the impugned detention order dated 17.1.2002 Annexure-1 to the writ petition passed under the N.S.A. The grounds of detention are Annexures-2 and 3 to the writ petition. A perusal of the same shows that the Petitioner appears to be a hardened criminal. It is alleged that on 5.12.1993 at about 3 p.m., the Petitioner fired on one Manager Yadav with the intention to kill him and thus caused injuries to Manager Yadav although he survived. This created terror in the village and the people shut the doors of their houses out of fear. On 28.5.1999, the Petitioner and his associates armed with deadly fire arms at about 7 a.m. attacked one Tuntun and his family members with deadly weapons due to which there was panic in the village and the people rushed to their houses out of fear and this resulted in break down of public order. Then again on 9.11.2000 at about 4 a.m., the Petitioner and his associates armed with bombs and fire arms attacked one Ram Bhavan Kurmi with bombs and fire arms and this created terror and panic in the locality and in this incident Ram Bhavan died. On 7.11.2001 at about 6.15 p.m., the Petitioner and his associates armed with fire arms killed one Rajesh Kurmi and injured one Bhishma and this created panic and terror in the locality.

3.

It is further alleged in the grounds of detention that after his release on bail in connection with the incident on 9.11.2000, the Petitioner has again started doing his criminal activities and disturbed the public order.

4.

No doubt the Petitioner''s earlier Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 15421 of 2001 had been allowed by this Court on 23.5.2000 vide Annexure-11 to the writ petition but that was on a technical point which does not arise in this case. The Petitioner appears to be a hardened criminal and it is well known that people are afraid to give evidence against such persons. Hence, we are of the opinion that the detention order is fully justified and validly passed. The petition is dismissed.