ANANDAN Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DIST COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Anandon is the brother of Raghu, who has been detained as a forest offender, under Tamil Nadu Act. 14 of 1982, in pursuance of an order of detention dated 5-5-1995, passed by the first respondent, District Magistrate and District Collector, North Arcot Ambedkar District, Vellore, with a view to preventing the detenu from noting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.

(2.) We do not deem it necessary to state the fact in detail; which led to the passing of the impugned order for this habeas corpus petition will have to be allowed in the short ground of lack of proper communication to the close relations of the detenu about the passing of the impugned order of detention and the place of detention. A communication dated 6-5-1995 addressed to Krishan Manthiri, father of the detenu, was affixed on the wall of the house of the detenu on 8-5-1995 and the reason for such affixture has been stated in the memorandum, which shows that the relations of the detenu, who were then present in the house of the detenu, refused to accept the intimation. This return made by the officials concerned does not indicate that Krishan Manthiri, father of the detenu, on whom it was sought to be served, was available at that point of time and he had refused to accept service. It that be the case, the position might have been different. If the relations of the detenu who have not been named in the intimation had refused to accept that intimation, it can well be understood, for apparently it was not addressed to them, but specifically to Krishan Manthiri. The serving authority ought to has taken efforts to service on Krishan Manthiri and in the even of his refusal, then they could have served by affixture. That not being the case, the law laid down by the Supreme Court in A.K. Roy v. Union of India, and the purpose for which such intimation is intended get certainly thwarted. On this sale ground the detenu is bound to succeed.

(3.) The impugned order of detention shall stand quashed. Detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his detention is otherwise required. This habeas corpus petition is allowed. Petition allowed.