P.N.BHAGWATI, J.

(1) THIS petition is directed against an order of detention dated 30/03/1973 made by the District Magistrate, Nadia under S. 3(1) (a) (ii) of the Maintenance of Intemal Security Act, 1971. The order of detention recited the satisfaction of the District Magistrate that with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order it was necessary to detain him and directed that the petitioner be accordingly detained. Pursuant to the order of detention, the petitioner was arrested on 3/04/1973 and at the time of his arrest the grounds of detention dated 30/03/1973 were served upon him together with their translation in Bengalee language. The grounds of detention started with a recital that the petitioner was being detained on the ground that he had been acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and set out one incident of dacoity committed by him on the basis of which the District Magistrate had reached his subjective satisfaction in regard to the necessity of detaining the petitioner. The usual ritual prescribed by the Act was thereafter followed and the order of detention was approved by the State government, the representation of the petitioner was considered and rejected, the case of the petitioner was placed before the Advisory Board and on receipt of the opinion of the Advisory Board, the order of detention was confirmed by the State Govemment. The present petition was filed by the petitioner from jail challenging the validity of this detention.

(2) THERE were several grounds urged before us on behalf of the petitioner in support of the petition, but it is not necessary to refer to all of them since there is one ground which is, in our opinion, sufficient to invalidate the order of detention. That ground rests on an averment made by the District Magistrate in paragraph 4 of the affidavit filed by him in reply to the petition. The District Magistrate stated as follows in paragraph 4 of his affidavit-in-reply:

I say that 1 passed the said order of detention after being bona fide satisfied from the materials on record as stated in the grounds of detention and so surrounding circumstances that with a view to preventing the detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order it was necessary to detain him under the provisions of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971

. . I further state that having regard to the nature of the act and the manner in which it was committed by the detenu (as disciosed in the grounds furnished to the detenu) and effect thereof on the public order I was bona fide satisfied that the said act was sufficient for making the said detention order. I was also further satisfied that if the detenu petitioner is not detained under the said Act, he is likely to act in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and Services essential to the community.

It will be seen from this Statement made by the District Magistrate that from the material on record he was not only satisfied that it was necessary to detain the petitioner with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, but was also satisfied that if the petitioner was not detained, he would be likely to act in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and Services essential to the community. The argument of the petitioner was that there was no nexus at all between the grounds of detention communicated to the petitioner and the subjective satisfaction of the District Magistrate that it was necessary to detain the petitioner with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and Services essential to the community and the order of detention based inter alia on such subjective satisfaction was invalid. Now, there can, be no doubt that if the order of detention was based on the subject