A G P TAMILVANAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the friend of the detenus, who were declared as " Goonda" under the Act 14 of 1982.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

(3.) Though in the petition several grounds have been raised, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner even at the foremost points out that what is stated in para 8 in English version of grounds of detention is not found in Tamil version supplied to the detenus. The learned counsel took us through the English version found in para 8 as well as the translated portion of the same supplied to the detenus. After going through the same, we are satisfied that the fact of representation made by the detenus to the Government will also be placed before the Advisory Board is absent in Tamil version of the order. In such circumstances, it is apparent that the detenus were not intimated that their representations sent to the Government will also be placed before the Advisory Board along with their cases. In an identical circumstance, a Division Bench of this Court in DEVARAJAN VS STATE ( 1999(II) CTC 175) accepted the similar contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and found that the above omission is fatal to the case and as such, the order of detention is vitiated. In our case, after satisfying both paragr aphs, we accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the above omission as pointed out is fatal to the case and as such, the order of detention is vitiated. In such circumstances, it is unnecessary for us to consider the other grounds raised in these Petitions.