Introduction :- 

The National Security Act was promulgated on September 23, 1980, "to provide for preventive detention in certain cases and for matters connected therewith".

• The grounds for preventive detention of a person include: Acting in any manner prejudicial to the defence of India, the relations of India with foreign powers, or the security of India.
• Regulating the continued presence of any foreigner in India or with a view to making arrangements for his expulsion from India
• Acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State or from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community it is necessary so to do.
• A detenu may be held for up to three months and in certain circumstances six months, without any review.
• A three person Advisory Board made up of high court judges or persons qualified to be high court judges determines the legitimacy of any order made for longer than three months. If approved, a person may be held extra-judicially for up to 12 months. The term can be extended if the government finds fresh evidence.
• The state government needs to be intimated that a person has been detained under the NSA. It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

History of Preventive Detention laws in India :- 

Pre-independence laws- Bengal Regulation III of 1818, Defence of India Act 1915, Rowlatt Acts of 1919 Post-independence laws-

• Preventive Detention Act (1950-1969)
• Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (1967)
• Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA) (1971- 1978)
• Conservation of Foreign exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities (COFEPOSA) (1974)
• National Security Act (1980)- amended in 1984, 1985 and 1988

Recent Cases :- 
UP government arrested three persons under the NSA in connection with an alleged cow-slaughter incident in Bulandshahr. A Manipur journalist, who had posted an alleged offensive Facebook post on the Chief Minister, was detained for 12 months under the NSA.

Concerns :-

• Accused is denied basic rights available to others arrested in normal course such as- Under Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) The person arrested has to be informed of the grounds of arrest, and the right to bail. Under NSA, a person could be kept in the dark about the reasons for his arrest for up to five days, and in exceptional circumstances not later than 10 days. Even when providing the grounds for arrest, the government can withhold information which it considers to be against public interest to disclose. It further provides that a person has to be produced before a court within 24 hours of arrest.
• Article 22(1) of the Constitution- an arrested person cannot be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice. Under NSA, the arrested person is not entitled to the aid of any legal practitioner in any matter connected with the proceedings before the advisory board. Violates due process of law- such as presumption of innocence
• Over-reliance of governments on preventive detention- In recent times, different State governments have invoked the stringent provisions of the NSA to detain citizens for questionable offences, which has brought the focus back on the potential abuse of the controversial law.
• No figures available for the exact number of detentions under the NSA- National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), which collects and analyses crime data in the country, does not include cases under the NSA in its data as no FIRs are registered. Against Constitutionalism – as government’s arbitrariness is not checked and is prone is misuse. 
• Can be used by the state to avoid other provisions of law- Many provisions like imperil the defence of state, relations with foreign powers etc. are already punishable under several sections of the IPC. NSA allows the government to keep such offenders in custody without charging them.

Arguments in favor of such a law :-

• Presence of anti-national forces- including terrorists, extremists, radical elements among others which threaten the unity and integrity of the nation.
• Intelligence gathering- Terrorists may use the provisions of innocence under the law to evade crucial details required immediately by the law enforcement agencies.
• Misuse is not an excuse for repeal- Mere allegation of misuse in particular cases should not undermine the efficacy in majority cases.
• Application is a part of reasonable restriction- provided under the Article 19 (2).

Way Forward :-

• There needs to be a balance drawn between security of the state and ensuring rights of the people.
• The law enforcement agencies must be sufficiently guided as to where the section must be imposed and where not. Standard Operating Guidelines must be put in place to ensure wrongful application of NSA does not take place.