1. The order of detention against the petitioner was passed by the District Magistrate, Aurangabad under Section 12(2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 on 8.6.2008. The petitioner against his detention order filed a representation through proper channel but the said representation is stated to have been disposed of after a delay of ten days.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention cited decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Rajammal V/s. State of Tamil Nadu and Another, AIR 1999 SC 684, wherein the Apex Court did not accept the explanation for delay of five days and set aside the detention by holding that the delay remained unexplained and such unexplained delay vitiates further detention of detenu and, accordingly, detenu was set at large forthwith.

3. Every case has to be considered on its own facts and a straightjacket formula cannot be applied in every case regarding explanation for delay in disposal of a case. The Honble Apex Court in the case of D.N. Anuradha V/s. Joint Secereary and another, (2006) 5 SCC 142, held that delay of more than 100 days due to nonavailability of translated copy of representation which was