V. RAJAGOPALA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE order of detention dt. 16-1-97 made by the Collector and District Magistrate, Anantapur, the 2nd respondent herein, in exercise of his powers conferred upon him in Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot Leggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 (for short, the Act ) and confirmed by the Government by order dt. 4-3-1997, is challenged in this writ petition.

( 2 ) SRI V. Ravinder Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, contended that the detenu s fundamental right guaranteed under Arts. 21 and 22 (5) of the Constitution, has been deprived, inasmuch as the detention order suffers from the vice of non-application of mind to vital documents and also for the failure to supply the said documents to the detenu. It was pointed out, specifically, that the detaining authority has not considered that the detenu has been enlarged on bail and in Cr. No. 86/92, after he was released on bail, he has been absconding evading the police and that NBW issued was pending against him, the detenu was supplied only with the FIRs, but not with the bail applications, bail orders, NBW and the material pertaining to the issue of NBW and the said defect in procedure renders the order illegal. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, refuted the contentions submitting forcefully that the order of granting bail to the detenu was not a relevant factor to be considered by the detaining authority while making an order of detention. Hence the detaining authority had neither considered the same nor supplied the copies to the detenu. The detenu is entitled for supply of the material which was considered by the detaining authority.

( 3 ) TO appreciate the above contentions it is necessary to notice the grounds of detention. Six incidents are mentioned as grounds of detention. Incidents 1, 2 and 4 speaks of earlier arrest and release on bail in various crimes. In the first incident dt. 2-6-92, two crimes have been registered against the detenu, which are pending trial in CC No. 312/92 on the file of the Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Anantapur and PRC No. 36/93 on the file of Addl. J. F. C. M. , Anantapur, and in the later case registered u/s. 307, IPC, it was alleged that the detenu was released on bail, but since he absconded thereafter. NBW was issued and was pending. The first contention relates to non-application of mind. The detaining authority has not considered the material on record, particularly the bail application, the orders granting bail and the other material in this regard, which was in possession of the concerned authorities, and the order issuing NBW. The second contention relates to the failure to supply the bail applications or the bail orders or the material to show that NBW was issued to the detenu. At this stage it may be useful to extract ground No. 1 :" (1) You first figured as an accused along with others in two cases Cr. No. 85/92 u/s. 324, IPC and Cr. No. 86/92 u/ss. 147, 148, 326, 307 r/w 149, IPC of II Town Anantapur P. S. and on the same day i. e. , on 2-6-92 you have been arrested and sent for remand, but came out on bail very soon. The two cases are pending trial against you as CC 312/92 on the file of AJFCM, Anantapur and PRC 38/96 on the file of AJFCM, Anantapur. In the later case after release on bail you have absconded and has been evading the police and NBW issued is pending. "from a reading of the above ground it can be seen that the basis for detention was that the detenu was arrested in two cases, but was released on bail and since he was absconding, NBW was issued against him and was pending. Whether those facts have been considered in their entirety, if so whether the detenu was entitled for the supply of the entire record and other material, basing on which the detaining authority has come to the conclusion for invoking the power of preventive detention ?

( 4 ) IN the counter-affi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document