Judgement

P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J. Three grounds have been urged against the validity of the detention order. Firstly that the petitioner being an illiterate person, the grounds have not been communicated to him. Secondly, that in criminal proceedings filed against him he was discharged on the same charges, which formed the grounds of his subsequent detention. Thirdly, relying on the decision in Jagdish Prasad v. The State of Bihar (1974) 4 SCC 455, wherein the District Magistrate did not file an affidavit it is contended that the absence of such an affidavit is fatal to the validity of the order of detention. None of these in our view has merit. No doubt the detenu has put his thumb impression, but his representation immediately after the service of the order shows that it must have been communicated to him, because he understood the grounds and made an effective representation. On the second ground the learned advocate. Mr. Gupta appearing as amicus curiae, submits that though the detenu was discharged, he could not have again been detained for the same offence. In support of this contention, he says that the petitioner was arrested on 20th June, 1972 and the detention order is dat