BINODANAND SINGH, J.

1. On 27-4-1989, I had joined in recording the operative part of the judgment, which is quoted hereinunder :

"Argument concluded. Order of detention of the petitioner was passed by the District Magistrate, Patna, on 26-5-1988 u/s. 12(2) of the Bihar Crime Control Act, 1981 as per Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The aforesaid detention order has been confirmed by the State Government by order dated 15-7-1988, as per Annexure-B to the counter affidavit and the petitioner has been directed to be detained till 26-5-1989. Thus the petitioner has already remained in detention for more than eleven months out of a year. In view of this fact, we declare the result. We are of the view that this application is fit to be allowed.

This application is, therefore, allowed and the order of detention passed against the petitioner as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition and the order of confirmation of detention order passed by the State Government as contained in Annexure-B to the counter affidavit are hereby quashed. The petitioner Raj Kumar Gupta is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. Reasons will follow."

Now I deal with the case and state reasons. This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus challenging the validity of detention of Raj Kumar Gupta, the detenu (hereinafter to be referred to as the petitioner) in Bankipur Central Jail, Patna, in pursuance of an order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Patna, u/s. 12(2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 (henceforth to be called as the Act).

2. The relevant facts are being stated on the basis of the averments made in this application, supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner and the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, which are not in dispute. The petitioner was in jail from before in connection with Khajekalan P. S. case No. 144 dated 1-11-1987. Order of detention u/s. 12(2) of the Act was passed by the District Magistrate, Patna under order No. 4915 dated 26-5-1988 directing that the petitioner be detained in Bankipur Central Jail, Patna, classified as Class-X, Division C, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ application.

3. The grounds on which the detention order was passed were communicated to the petitioner as provided u/s. 17(1) of the Act vide order No. 4916, C Patna dated 26-5-1988, annexure-as Annexure-2 to the writ application. It appears that the order of detention and grounds with connected papers were served on the petitioner in Bankipur Central jail on 27-5-1988. The order of detention passed against the petitioner by the District Magistrate, Patna, got approval of the State Government as required u/s. 12(3) of the Act on 3-6-1988 (copy of the order passed by the State Government in this regard is appended as Annexure-3).

4. On 16-6-1988 vide letter No. 5692 of the date, the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Home (Police) Department forwarded the order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Patna, grounds of detention along with relevant documents and the order of approval of detention of the petitioner passed by the State Government to the Advisory Board as required u/s. 19 of the Act (copy of letter is annexed as Annexure-A to the counter-affidavit of the State which has come in return). The papers were received by Shri S.N.Sinha, Assistant Registrar III of the High Court, Ex-officio Secretary to the Advisory Board on the same date and 20-6-1988 was fixed by the Board for production of the petitioner. On 18-6-1988 the petitioner sent his representation to the State Government through the jail Authority. The Advisory Board considered the materials placed before it and submitted its report along with opinion on the same day, i.e., on 20-6-1988 to the effect that there were sufficient grounds for the detention of the petitioner. On receipt of t