G. JAYANTHY Vs. COMMISSIONER & SECRETARY TO GOVT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in all these writ petitions is the same. The prayer is also the same, in that issue of habeas corpus for production of the respective detunes, Thiru Gnansekaran, V. Dhayanandaraja and R. Sivakundu before this court for their being set at liberty, after quashing the impugned order of detention dated 27 - 3 -1991 passed by the respondent, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Foreigner Act, 1946 (Central Act 31 of 1946) read with the Notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs No. 4/3/56 (1) F -l dated 19 -4 -1958, .for regulating the continued presence of the respective detunes, who are the foreigners (Srilankan Nationals), has seen sought for.

(2.) THE orders of detention are similar, except the names of to detunes and the body of the order is identical. The order passed is extracted hereunder :

(3.) ON these contentions, we have heard the learned Public Prosecutor Mr. B. Sriramulu. He contended that the power to detain under section 8 of the Foreigners Act was absolute. If the petitioner had any grievance, the had to place it before the Government for redress. These were not a case of mala -fide exercise of power and no material has been placed to even remotely indicate lack of bona fides in promulgating the impugned orders of detention. He relied upon a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in Kala Imahi v. Government of" Tamil Nadu1.