Case: Mohd. Munna &amp; Others Vs. State of W.B

1. These are petitions under Article 32 challenging the detention made under the West Bengal (Prevention of Violent Activities) Act 1970 (hereinafter called the Act). In these Writ Petitions the opinion of the Advisory Board has been confirmed by the State Government on respective dates, which are beyond 3 months from the date of arrest of the petitioners. We have in the judgment pronounced in Writ Petition No. 218 of 71 = (reported in AIR 1972 SC 1924 ) held that the confirmation and commuincation by the Government of the order of detention beyond 3 months makes the detention illegal. Mr. P. K. Chatterjee who appeared for the State of West Bengal brought to our notice that President has promulgated emergency and wanted time to examine that order when these matters came up for hearing yesterday, the 6th December, 1971. They were adjourned till today for facilitating him to produce the order. He has reported that he has not been able to get any definite information whether Article 21 and 22 have been suspended by the President under Article 359. We are now informed by the Registrar that no. such order has been made. We are, therefore, free to consider these cases.P. No. 231 of 1971.2. The order of detention in this case was made onon which date the State Government was also informed. The detenu was arrested onand served with the orders of detention and the grounds therefor. The State Government approved the detention order onand on the same day made a report to the Central Government. The case was placed before the Advisory Board onTwo representations were made by the detenu on1. These representations were considered by the State Government and rejected onThe Advisory Board gave its opinion onNo. 284 of 1971.3. The order of detention in this case was made onon which date the State Government was also informed. The detenu was arrested onon which date the orders of detention and the grounds therefor were also served on the detenu. A report was made to the State Government onand the State Government approved that order onOn the same day it sent a report to the Central Government. The case was placed before the Board onBefore that a representation was received onwhich was considered by the Government are rejected onThe Advisory Boards opinion was given onP. No. 285 of 1971.4. The detention order in this case was made onand on the same day communicated to the State Government, which approved of it onOn the same day a report was made by the State Government to the Central Government. Two representations were received on1. These were considered by the State Government on1, and rejected. Onthe case was placed before the Advisory Board which gave its opinion onP. No. 286 of 1971.5. The order of detention in this case was made onand on the same day it was reported to the State Government, which approved of it onThe petitioner was arrested onon which date the orders of detention and grounds therefor were also served on the detenu. A report was also made to the Central Government onA representation was received onwhich was considered and rejected by the State Government onthe case was placed before the Advisory Board which gave its opinion onP. No. 328 of 1971.6. The order of detention in this case was made onand sent to the Government for approval on the same day and the Government approved of it onand made a report on the same day to the Central Government. The detenu was arrested onon which date the order and the grounds of detention were served on him. He made a representation which was received onThe Government considered this representation and rejected it onThe case was placed before the Advisory Board onand the Board gave its opinion on329 of 1971.7. The order of detention in this case was made onand sent to the State Government for approval on the same day. The State Government approved of the order onand made a report to the Central Government in respect thereof on the same day. The detenu was arrested onIt does not appear that the made any representation.The case was placed before the Advisory Board onand the Board gave its opinion that there was sufficient cause for detention onNo. 330 of 1971.8. The order of detention was made in this case onand sent to the Government on the same day for approval. The State Govt. approved of it onand made a report to the Central Government on the same day. The detenu was arrested onon which date he was served with the order of detention and the grounds of detention. He made a representation which was received onThis was considered and rejected onThe State Government placed the case before the Advisory Board onand the Advisory Board gave its opinion that there was sufficient cause for detention on305 of 1971.9. The order of detention in this case made onand communicated to the State Government on the same day. It was approved by the State Government onThe case was placed before the Advisory Board onand the opinion of the Board that there was sufficient cause was sent to the Government onThe detenu was arrested onP. No. 310 of 1971.10. The order of detention in this case was made onand approved by the State Government one detenu was arrested onwhen the order of detention and the grounds therefor were also served on him. A representation was made by the petitioner onwhich was dismissed by the State Government onThe case was placed before the Advisory Board onand the Board submitted its opinion that there was sufficient cause for detention onP. No. 312 of 1971.11. The detention order in this case was passed onand the Government approved of the same one detenu was arrested onand served with the order and the grounds therefor on the same day. His representation was rejected onThe case was placed before the Advisory Board onand the report of the Board that in its opinion there was sufficient cause for his detention was sent to the Government onThe detention order was confirmed by the State Government on

Reasoning:
12. It will be seen from the facts stated above that in all those Writ Petitions the mandatory provisions of the Act with regard to detention have been duly observed except that confirmation and continuation of the detention order under Section 12 has not been made within 3 months from the date of detention.