Jharkhand HC Slams Govt Over CCA Order Against Bhairav Singh, Seeks Response

 📰 Jharkhand HC Slams Govt Over CCA Order Against Bhairav Singh, Seeks Response

Ranchi: The Jharkhand High Court has sought a response from the State Government regarding the case where Bhairav Singh, associated with Hindu organizations, was detained under the Jharkhand Crime Control Act (CCA).

Hearing the matter on Tuesday, the Division Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad made a prima facie observation that Bhairav Singh appeared to have been detained under the CCA without sufficient evidence.

Court's Oral Remarks and Questions

The Court orally commented that in cases related to the Mahavir Temple and Kali Temple, the High Court itself had previously passed orders on several Public Interest Litigations (PILs). Passing a detention order in such cases, beyond jurisdiction, suggests circumstances akin to an Emergency.

The Court raised several questions to the State Government:

 * Why was the petitioner not informed of the decision taken by the Government regarding the detention application filed by them?

 * Why was the petitioner presented before the Detaining Board three weeks later, and why was he not informed of the Board's decision?

 * When the petitioner was previously externed (district badar) for only 15 days, how can a fresh detention order be passed on the same grounds?

Arguments by Petitioner's Counsel

Senior Advocates Ajit Kumar and Abhay Mishra, appearing for the petitioner, argued that:

 * Bhairav Singh is not a professional criminal.

 * The detention order passed against him under the Jharkhand Crime Control Act is contrary to the provisions of the Constitution.

 * All cases filed against Bhairav Singh are related to protests and demonstrations held in support of Sanatan Dharma.

 * They also argued that a detention order cannot be passed again on the same grounds used for the previous district badar action.

 * According to them, the CCA sections do not even apply against Bhairav Singh.

After hearing the arguments from both sides, the Court directed the State Government to file a response in the matter.