KUMAR Vs. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Kumar is himself the detenu. He has been detained, as a bootlegger under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, in pursuance of an order of detention dated 11.7.1993 passed by the first Respondent, District Magistrate and Collector of North Arcot Ambedkar District, Vellore, with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and health.

(2.) IT will be totally unnecessary to detail the facts which led to the passing of the impugned order of detention, for this habeas corpus petition is bound to be allowed, on the short ground of non -supply of documents relied upon, even after a request was made by the detenu, through his representation, dated 22.7.1993.,

(3.) INSPITE of the said telegram having been taken into consideration, while arriving at the subjective satisfaction, Detaining Authority had not chosen to furnish a copy of the same to the detenu, either along with the grounds or even thereafter, when a specific request was made for supply of the said telegram. No supply of this telegram, is certainly prejudicial to the case of the detenu, since the subject matter of the telegram relates to illegal detention by the police.