IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1135 of 2010 KANTI PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. 30.11.2010. Prayer of the petitioner is for declaration that his detention is illegal as well as in violation of article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. The detention order has been issued against one Vyas Prasad on 9.4.2009 vide order no.2062. Petitioner was an employee working in the shop of Vyas Prasad, known as M/S Kuber Bhandar. It seems that in connection with that very detention order on 30.8.2010, the petitioner was taken into custody and sent to Bhagalpur jail, since then he is in custody. The petitioner’s case is that till date no detention order has been issued and served to him under the provision of Conservation of Foreign Exchange Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974(hereinafter referred to as (COFEPOSA)and without furnishing any detention order, illegally the petitioner has been kept under detention. Time was allowed to the counsel for the State for filing counter affidavit. 2 Today, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.3, The Superintendent(Special)Central Jail, Bhagalpur, stating that vide order contained in memo no.1562 dated 15.11.2010, the petitioner has been released from detention in connection with COFEPOSA, but still he is in custody in connection with some other cases. A production warrant was issued by the Presiding Officer, Special Court, Economic Offences, Muzaffarpur, Bihar dated 15.9.2010 for production of petitioner in connection with Raxaul Unit Case No.59, Trial No.279 of 2010 and respondent no.3 was requested to transfer the petitioner to Shaheed Khudiram Bose, Central Jail, Muzaffarpur. In compliance of this production warrant, arrangements regarding transfer of the petitioner, in proper security was made and the petitioner thereafter has been transferred to the Central Jail, Muzaffarpur. This counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.3, which simply indicates that the detention order was issued in favour of the petitioner has been revoked. No counter affidavit has been filed 3 on behalf of other Respondent to reply the question raised by the petitioner, regarding non-supply of the detention order to the petitioner and non-consideration of his representation by the respondents. Since an order revocating the order of detention has been passed, as such, the issue itself has come to an end. Accordingly, this application is disposed of. B.Kr. ( Mridula Mishra,J. ) ( Dharnidhar Jha,J.)