ISLAM UDDIN Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying for the following reliefs: -

(2.) THE respondent Nos 1,2,3,4 and 7 filed an affidavit -in -opposition on 8/7/08. The respondent No.8 had filed his affidavit -in -opposition on 20/6/08. No affidavit -in -reply has been filed against the said two affidavits.

(3.) ON 30/11/2011, this Court recorded the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. I. Longjem, that he along with Mr. S.M. Ozukum had withdrawn from the case as counsel for the petitioner and that the same was duly communicated to the petitioner. This Court, while posting the matter for hearing after winter vacation, directed the Registry to re -issue notice to the petitioner informing him about the fixing of the case as well as withdrawal of the names by the learned counsel appearing for him. On 1/3/2012, this Court noted that attendance of the petitioner could not be procured and that petitioner is absent without any steps. Registry was directed to again inform the petitioner through the concerned Police Station regarding pendency of the case and to take steps if he so desired. In the order dated 1/3/2012, this Court also noted that though the petitioner is absent without steps, as a question of illegal detention is raised, the matter required to be examined and disposed of in accordance with law. Side by side, Mr. C.T. Jamir, learned senior counsel was also appointed to assist the Court as "Amicus Curiae". Office note dated 20/3/2012 indicates that the Officer -in -Charge, East Police Station, Dimapur had served the petitioner and had obtained acknowledgement. The petitioner, apparently, has not engaged any other learned advocate. He has also not instructed Mr. C.T. Jamir, though he is aware that Mr. C.T. Jamir has been appointed as "Amicus Curie" as the order dated 1/3/2012 was served upon him.