SITAL PARSHAD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the release from custody of Mukat Lal who has been ordered to be detained in custody under Section 3 of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950.

(2.) The order of detention was passed on the 6th April, 1951, the detenu was arrested on the 15th June and his representation was rejected by the Advisory Board on the 4th August. The present petition for the issue of a writ of 'habeas corpus' was presented in this Court on the 23rd August. Among other reasons it was mentioned that the detenu was entitled to be released as he had received no reply to the representation made by him to the Advisory Board.

(3.) Section 3 of the Preventive Detention Act does not prescribe the period for which a person can be detained, but Section30 imposes a statutory obligation on the Advisory Board to submit a report to Government within a period of 10 weeks from the date of the detention. Section 11 prescribes the action that should be taken when the report of the Advisory Board is received by Government. Sub-section (1) declares that if the Advisory Board is of the opinion that there is sufficient cause for the detention of the detenu, the Government may confirm the order of detention and continue the detention for such period as it thinks fit. Sub-section (2) declares that if the Advisory Board is of the opinion that there is no sufficient cause for detention, Government shall revoke the detention order and cause the person to be released forthwith. Sub-section (1) of Section 11 does not specify the period during which the order of detention should be confirmed by the appropriate Government, but there can be little doubt that it should be confirmed within a reasonable period, i.e., within a period which a man of ordinary prudence would consider reasonable in the circumstances of the case.