THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 14th September 2009 WRIT PETITION NO.15111 of 2009 Between: O.Nagalakshmi, W/o.oggu Ganesh @ Yarra Nani, 24 years, R/o. D.No.27-33-37, Godavallivari Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada, Krishna District. …PETITIONER AND 1. Government of A.P., rep.by its Chief Secretary to Government, General Admn. (Law & Order.II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. And two others. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.15111 of 2009 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar) The petitioner seeks a Writ of Habeas Corpus to produce her husband who is detained in Central Prison, Rajahmundry, and seeks his release forthwith by declaring his detention as illegal. The petitioner’s husband was detained under Section 3 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Boot Leggers, Dacoits, Drug- Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 {Act No.1 of 1986} {“Act No.1 of 1986” for brevity}, by the order of the Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada City dated 03.03.2009. The said order of detention was approved by the State Government on 09.03.2009 and thereafter, by the Advisory Board on 31.03.2009. The Government of A.P., by order dated 03.04.2009 vide G.O.Rt.No.1642 General Administration (Law & Order.II) Department, confirmed the detention under sub-Section (1) of Section 12 read with Section 13 of Act No.1 of 1986 and directed the detention of the petitioner’s husband to be continued for a period of twelve {12} months from the date of his detention. The order of detention passed by the Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada City, manifests that the involvement of the petitioner’s husband in four {4} separate criminal cases formed the basis for the conclusion that the petitioner’s husband was a “Goonda”, within the meaning of Act No.1 of 1986 requiring him to be detained as a preventive measure. The four {4} cases cited as the grounds for detention pertain to the years 2002, 2008, 2008 and 2007 respectively. As the grounds of detention, supporting the order of detention dated 03.03.2009, specifically mention the details and records pertaining to various crimes in which the petitioner’s husband is alleged to have been involved, we put a question to the learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the learned Advocate General as to whether the provisions of Section 8 (1) of Act No.1 of 1986 had been complied with. The said provision requires that the authority making the order of detention should communicate within a period of five {5} days from the date of detention, the grounds on which the detention has been ordered thereby affording him an early opportunity for making a representation against the order of the Government. The learned Assistant Government Pleader fairly conceded that there is no material to show that the documents and record pertaining to one of the three criminal cases, which formed the grounds for detention, had been made available to the petitioner’s husband within five {5} days from the date of his detention as statutorily required. In the light of this statutory violation, the order of detention and its subsequent confirmation by the other authorities under Act No.1 of 1986 cannot be sustained being violative of Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India. On this short ground, the petitioner has to succeed. The order of detention dated 03.03.2009, the confirmation thereafter by the Advisory board on 31.03.2009 and by the Government vide G.O.Rt.No.1642 General Administration (Law & Order.II) Department dated 03.04.2009 are accordingly set aside. The Writ Petition is allowed directing the release of the petitioner’s husband forthwith, if not required in any other case. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (D.S.R.VARMA, J) _________________ (SANJAY KUMAR, J) 14th September 2009 RRB