IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.498 of 2011 Munna Khan @ Aftab son of Jamruddin Khan, Resident of village-Tetaria, Police Station-Madhuvan, District-West Champaran, Presently resident at in the house of Maulana Saheb Matiur Rahman, Lal Mia Ki Dargah, Narharpur, Phulwarisharif, Police Station-Phulwarisharif, District-Patna. …… Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Under Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Patna. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Patna. 5. The Inspector General (Prison), Old Secretariat, Patna. 6. The Jail Superintendent, Adarsh Central Jail, Beur, Patna. 7. The Jail Superintendent, Phulwarisharif Jail, Patna. ….. Respondents. ----- 06 19.07.2011 By this writ application, the petitioner challenges his detention under the provisions of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981. While in custody, in a criminal case the petitioner was served with the detention order issued by the District Magistrate, Patna dated 21.10.2010, which was approved by the Government on 29.10.2010. It is not in dispute that on 20.11.2010, the petitioner filed a representation against his detention. It appears that on 26.11.2010, the petitioner’s detention was approved by the Advisory Board and consequently by the Government on 13.12.2010. The representation that was filed by the petitioner having been forwarded by the Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, Patna was received by the Government on 24.12.2010 and 2 29.12.2010 the Government rejected the representation. A counter affidavit has been filed. However the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the preventive detention of the petitioner stands vitiated for inordinate and unexplained delay in consideration of his representation against his detention. He further submits that on 20.11.2010, the petitioner had made a representation against his preventive detention, while petitioner was detained at Patna itself and the representation was then to be forwarded by the District- Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Patna to the State Government. What happened in between has not been explained by the State in its counter affidavit. It admits that the representation was received by the Government on 24.12.2010, that is, more than a month later. He submits that petitioner was detained in Patna. It had to be forwarded to the District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Patna itself, still it took over one month to do so. In the counter affidavit as filed by the State, no effort has been made to explain the delay. Admittedly, there is no explanation except lapse on part of the respondents. Having considered the matter and the facts aforesaid, being not in dispute, we have no option but to hold that by reason of this unexplained and inordinate delay in consideration of the representation against preventive detention, the detention of the petitioner violates the constitutional rights guaranteed to a citizen and, as such, the detention becomes unconstitutional, 3 notwithstanding its approval by the Advisory Board or the State Government or rejection of his representation on subsequent date. Let the petitioner be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. The writ application is allowed. Kamlesh/ ( Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)