(1.) The Petitioner is aggrieved by his detention under Section 12 (2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 by the District Magistrate, Gopalganj vide his memo No. 3034/C dated 29.8.2002. The order was approved by the State Government under Section 12(3) of the Act on 9.9.2002 vide Annexure 2. The Petitioner seeks quashing of the said orders and his release.
(2.) Before setting out the contention of the Counsel for the Petitioner it may be mentioned that the detention order along with the grounds was served on the Petitioner on 31.8.2002. On 18.9.2002 he filed representation. On 16.10.2002 the Petitioner was informed that his representation had been rejected.
(3.) It was submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that there was inordinate delay in disposal of the representation amounting to violation of Petitioner's fundamental right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution and the detention is fit to be quashed on this ground alone. The law is settled on the point that what is of significance is not quantum of delay as such, but the explanation of the delay. The Respondents have filed counter affidavits-one on behalf the Department and the other on behalf: the District Magistrate-from perusal which it appears that the representation submitted by the Petitioner on 18.9.20(sic) was sent by the jail authorities to the Ho(sic) (Special) Department on 19.9.2002 i.e. (sic) the next day. On 23.9.2002 it was received in the Department. On the same day co(sic)ments were called for from the Deta(sic) Authority i.e. District Magistrate, Gopalganj On 27.9.2002 the District Magistrate (sic) his comments. The comments were (sic) ceived in the Department on 4.10.2002.(sic) 5.10.2002 the office dealt with the repre-sentation. The Deputy Secretary and (sic) Secretary of the Department put up (sic) notes on 7.10.2002 and 8.10.2002, respec-tively. On 9.10.2002 the Minister Incha(sic) agreeing with their opinion, rejected representation. The rejection was com(sic) nicated to the Petitioner on 16.10.2002.