R. R. K. TRIVEDI, J. ( 1 ) PETITIONER Mahboob has filed this writ petition for grant of writ of habeas corpus directing respondents to release him from detention and to quash the order of detention dated 15-6-1998, Annexure 1 to the writ petition, passed by respondent No. 2, under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). ( 2 ) ALONG with the order of detention petitioner was also served the grounds of detention on which the petitioner has been detained under the Act. The grounds are as under :1. That on 17-2-1996, at 5. 00 p. m. , Shri Suresh, Inspector in-charge of police station Lodhi Colony, New Delhi who is member of operation cell, Lodhi Colony, with the help of other members, arrested Kris Teef Jelvazor, a citizen of Switzerland, and Mohd. Hassan Poddar alias Azis Batloni alias Sheikh Majeed alias Hassan Aroli, son of Mohd. Husain, resident of Lahore (Pakistan) from Lodhi Colony, New Delhi and recovered from their possession 361 pistols of different make, 367 empty magazines with 3788 cartridges for which a criminal case was registered at Police Station, Lodhi Colony as case Crime No. 64 of 1996, under Sections 112b/121/121a/122/124 I. P. C. and 25/54/59of the Arms Act. DURING investigation it was revealed that petitioner was one of the associates of the two foreigners arrested. Consequently, a charge sheet was filed on 29-4-1996 for trial of the petitioner and his two associate culprits. It has been alleged that this activity of the petitioner and his associates culprits was anti-national and it was done with the design to help spread disintegration and terrorist activities in the country and to dethrone the Government of India which amounts to waging war against the country for which charge sheet has been submitted and is under consideration of the Court. 2. That on 21-2-1998, Sub-Inspector Baljit Singh of Police Station Mangolpuri, New Delhi, a member of the operation Cell, Lodhi Colony, arrested petitioners companions Ashok Kumar Chhabra and Islam at 5. 10 p. m. from two kilometres in the north of Yuva Shakti Model School, Sector III, Rohini, Delhi, Police Station Mangolpuri and recovered a huge quantity of illegal firearms and cartridges which were manufactured in Pakistan. The aforesaid arrested persons in order to save themselves and for killing police personnels, fired at them. 10 p. m. from two kilometres in the north of Yuva Shakti Model School, Sector III, Rohini, Delhi, Police Station Mangolpuri and recovered a huge quantity of illegal firearms and cartridges which were manufactured in Pakistan. The aforesaid arrested persons in order to save themselves and for killing police personnels, fired at them. Police, however, arrested them with the firearm and a criminal case, Crime No. 171 of 1998, under Section 307/186/120b/353/121/121a/122/123 I. P. C. and Sections 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act was registered at Police Station Mangolpuri. During investigation, petitioner along with the arrested persons was found involved in illegal smuggling of firearm in the country which were aimed at dethroning the Government of India and they were active members of the ISI of Pakistan and indulged in ante-national activities. After investigation a charge sheet was filed against the petitioner and his companions which is under consideration of the Court. ( 3 ) THAT on 22-10-1997, Senior Sub-Inspector Atar Singh of Police Station Kairana arrested the petitioner with one Kg. of Doda posta and powder in respect of which a case was registered as case crime No. 276 of 1997, under Sections 18/25 of N. D. P. S. Act at Police Station Kairana. After investigation charge sheet No. 181 of 1997 was filed on 17-12-1997 which is under consideration of the Court. ( 4 ) THAT Inspector-in-charge of Local Intelligence Unit Bagpat arrested the petitioner on 19-5-1998, at 10. 30 a. m. in Kasba Baghpat with forged and manufactured visas for sending persons to Pakistan. During investigation a case was found against the petitioner for preparing forged Visas in respect of which charge sheet No. 211 of 10-6-1998 was filed against him and a case was registered at Police Station, Baghpat as case crime No. 198 of 1998, under Sections 20/467/468/471/472 I. P. C. In this case the petitioner is under detention in District Jail, Meerut from 19-5-1998. The petitioner has filed a bail application in the Court in which 15-6-1998 has been fixed for hearing in the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Meerut. There is strong possibility of the petitioner being released on bail and there is apprehension that after release from jail, the petitioner will, again indulge in serious anti-national activities and heinous crimes, which shall be against the maintenance of the public order. 3. There is strong possibility of the petitioner being released on bail and there is apprehension that after release from jail, the petitioner will, again indulge in serious anti-national activities and heinous crimes, which shall be against the maintenance of the public order. 3. On the aforesaid facts the detaining authority recorded his subjective satisfaction that there is a strong possibility that petitioner will act in a manner which shall be prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order and for preventing the petitioner from indulging in any such activity which may be prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order, it is necessary to detain him. 4. Petitioner was also informed that he has right to represent before the State Government, Advisory Board and the Central Government against his detention. The representation to the State Government may be addressed to the Home Secretary, State of U. P. , Lucknow. The representation to the Advisory Board may be addressed to the Chairman, Advisory Board (Detentions ). Representation for the Central Government may be addressed to the secretary (Home), Union of India (internal Security) North Block, New Delhi. The aforesaid representations may be sent through and may be handed over to Superintendent of the District Jail where the petitioner is detained. Petitioner was also informed that the representation for the Advisory Board may be submitted within three weeks and if it is filed late, then the Advisory Board may not consider the same. Petitioner was also informed that he is entitled for a personal hearing before the Advisory Board. If the petitioner so desires, he may mention the fact in this representation addressed to the Advisory Board.