JUDGMENT

S.N. Variava, J.- Leave granted.

2. Heard Parties.

3. This Appeal is against an order dated 10th March, 2000. By this Order a detention Order dated 7th April, 1999 has been quashed on the ground that in the Affidavit of the Sponsoring Authority it has been mentioned that the Detenu was involved in six cases and that in the detention Order it has been stated that the Detenu was involved in four occurrences in four different cases. It is held that the Detenu had been given copies of documents in respect of one case only even though the Detaining Authority was bound to give copies in all the six cases. It is held that thus the Detenu had been denied an effective opportunity to defend himself. On this ground the detention Order was set aside.

4. It is correct that the Detaining Authority has to apply its mind before issuing a Detention Order. However, it is equally important that the Court, hearing a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, also applies its mind before it quashes a Detention Order. Undoubtedly, in the Affidavit filed by the Sponsoring Authority reliance has been placed on six cases. However, the Detaining Authority has not placed reli