Chinnappa vs The District Magistrate and Collector of Tiruchirapalli and another

Arunachalam, J.—Petitioner Chinnappa has been detained as a ''bootlegger'' under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, in pursuance of an order of

detention dated 29.2.1993 passed by the first Respondent, District Magistrate and District Collector, Tiruchirapalli, with a view to preventing him

from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and public health.

It will be totally unnecessary to state the facts in detail, which led to the passing of the impugned order for, this habeas corpus petition has to be

allowed on the short ground of non-placing of the bail application before the Detaining Authority, when the impugned order was passed, coupled

with non-supply of the said document to the detenu is spite of a requisition having have been made.

Mr. A.K.S. Thahir, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, pointed out paragraph 5 of the grounds of detention showing that the

detaining authority was aware of the Petitioner having been released on bail. If that be so, his contention was that the bail petition preferred by the

Petitioner must also have been placed before the Detaining Authority and supplied to him as well.

On this ground of challenge, we have heard Mr. S. Shanmughavelayudham, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

In Abdul Sathar Ibrahim Manik Vs. Union of India and others, , Supreme Court has stated as hereunder:

In a case where the detenu is released on bail and is at liberty at the time of passing of the order of detention, men the Detaining Authority has to.

necessarily rely upon them as that would be a vital ground for ordering detention. In such a case, bail application and the order granting bail should

necessarily be placed before the authority and the -copies should also be supplied to the detenu.

It is not disputed that bail petition was neither placed before the Detaining Authority nor supplied to the detenu. On the law laid down by the

Supreme Court, detenu is bound to succeed.

In the result, the impugned order of detention shall stand set aside. Detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his detention is

otherwise required. This habeas corpus petition is allowed.