SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1974 Supreme(SC) 309

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Y.V. CHANDRACHUD AND R.S. SARKARIA, JJ.
Bhola Bhuiya, Petitioner
Versus
The State of W.B., Respondent.
Writ Petn. No. 2009 of 1973, D/- 3-10-1974.

Headnote:

Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971- Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 22 (5) - Maintenance of Supplies and Service - Grounds of Detention - Petitioner was detained by an order passed by District Magistrate - Order purports to have been passed in order to prevent petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to maintenance of supplies and service essential to community – Held, On last occasion when this matter had come up for hearing court had asked respondent, State of West Bengal, to make an affidavit on question whether grounds furnished to petitioner were explained to him in a language which he could understand - Accordingly, as affidavit has been filed by Mr. S. K. Saha, Police Inspector, who served detention were explained to petitioner - That affidavit shows that grounds of detention in Hindi which is language that petitioner understands - There is therefore no substance in contention that order of detention is vitiated on account of non-compliance with provisions of Art. 22 (5) of Constitution - Rule discharge.

Judgment

CHANDRACHUD, J.:- The petitioner was detained by an order dated January 14, 1972 passed by the District Magistrate, Burdwan, under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. 1971. The order purports to have been passed in order to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and service essential to the community.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends in this habeas corpus petition that the petitioner is an illiterate person and since the grounds of detention were not explained to him in his own language he was denied an opportunity to make an effective representation against the order of detention. On the last occasion when this matter had come up for hearing the court had asked the respondent, the State of West Bengal, to make an affidavit on the question whether the grounds furnished to the petitioner were explained to him in a language which he could understand. Accordingly, as affidavit has been filed by Mr. S. K. Saha, the Police Inspector, who served the detention were explained to the petitioner. That affidavit shows that the grounds of detention in Hindi which is the language that the petitioner understands. There is therefore no substance in the contention that the order of detention is vitiated on account of non-compliance with the provisions of Art. 22 (5) of the Constitution.

3. Accordingly, we confirm the order and discharge the rule.

Rule discharge.

For Citation : AIR 1974 SC 2122

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top