OMPRAKASH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With consent heard finally.

(2.) Although in the writ petition various grounds have been raised challenging the impugned detention order, however, during the course of the hearing learned counsel for the petitioner has urged only ground to the effect that the order of petitioner's detention was passed when he was already in custody for an offence registered as Crime No.440/11, which is in violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in various cases.

(3.) In order to support the plea raised, learned counsel for the petitioner drawn our attention to the letter dated 20.03.2012 addressed by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Ujjain. On going through the said letter it is clear that petitioner was sent in judicial custody on 26.08.2011 on the basis of the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ujjain in regard to an offence registered as Crime No.440/11 under Sections 294, 341 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 25/27 of the Arms Act. It is also clear from the said letter that while in custody the petitioner was served with the order of detention on 25.09.2011.