AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Balasubramanian, J.
It is stated therein as follows: (The special reports is in Tamil and we are translating the relevant portion of that in English hereunder).
The detenu and the others were arrested on 06.04.1999 and produced before the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate on the same day. The remand
Court remanded the detenu and the other accused till 20.04.1999. Pursuant to this remand, the detenu and the other accused are lodged in the
Central Prison, Madras. On the remand extension request made by the sponsoring authority the Court had extended the remand for a further
period of 15 days from 20.04.1999 till 04.05.1999.
If really the special report was available on the day of the order of detention it would have been impossible for the sponsoring authority to state
in his affidavit on the expiry of the remand on 20.04.1999 it was extended for another 15 days, upto 04.05.1999. The remand extension is shown
to have come into existence only and with effect from 20.04.1999. The detention order was passed on 16.04.1999. Therefore, this information
regarding the extension of remand from 20.04.1999 to 04.05.1999 would not have been available even to the sponsoring authority on the date
when he filed the affidavit. This raises a serious doubt as to whether this special report was before the detaining authority on the date when he
passed the order of detention. If the special report is eschewed from consideration, there is no material available before the detaining authority to
arrive a the subjective satisfaction that the detenu was in remand, this according to us, vitiates the impugned order or detention, if it therefore set a
side and the detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless required to be detained in connection with any other case.