(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA)

In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

“1 That this writ application is being filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas corpus directing the respondent to release the petitioner from illegal custody and such order may be passed after quashing of the impugned order of detention passed under section 12(2), 21(i) and 22 of the Bihar control of Crime Act (here in after referred as Act) contained in memo no. 409 dated 27.3.2012, memo no. 3687 dated 2.5.2012 respectively passed by the detune authority and also direct to pay compensation for illegal detention.”

2. The facts in brief giving rise to this writ application lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner, while he was in judicial custody in connection with Dharhara P.S. Case No. 113 of 2011 lodged under Section 25(1-B), 26 & 27 of the Arms Act, he was served with a notice issued under the pen and signature of District Magistrate, Munger contained in memo no. 207 dated 15.2.2012 along with a recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, Munger directing him to file his show-cause reply on or before 27.2.2012 as to why an order under Section 12(2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act for his detention should not be passed. The petitioner claims that he had filed his show-cause reply on 25.2.2012, whereafter, the impugned order of detention of the petitioner came to be passed on 27.3.2012 wherein having given the details of continued criminal activities born out his being accused in five cases, namely, Dharhara P.S. Case No. 111 of 2004, Dharhara P.S. Case No. 46 of 2004, Dharhara P.S. Case No. 1 of 2005, Dharhara P.S. Case No. 58 of 2005 and Dharhara P.S. Case No. 41 of 2007 by way of his criminal antecedent, the impugned order of detention was passed on the ground of his being a menace in maintenance of public order by citing illustration of his being also made accused in recent four criminal cases namely Dharhara P.S. Case No. 113 of 2011 dated 14.10.2011, Dharhara P.S. Case No. 36 of 2011 and Dharhara P.S. Case No. 72 of 2010 and Dharhara P.S. Case No. 86 of 2010 dated 14.7.2010.

3. After the said order of detention dated 27.3.2012 was passed by the District Magistrate, Munger, the same was approved by the State Government in terms of Section 12(3) of the Act by an order dated 4.4.2012, The case of the petitioner was thereafter placed before the Advisory Board on 18.4.2012 and when the Advisory Board had also its meeting held on 24.4.2012 after hearing the petitioner had recorded its opinion approving the detention of the petitioner whereafter the State Government had confirmed the order of detention of the petitioner by passing the impugned order dated 2.5.2012 directing him to remain in detention till 26.3.2012 i.e. till completion of a period of one year from 27.3.2012 to 26.3.2013.

4. Mr. Khurshid Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order of detention is bad both on fact and in law and in this regard, he has stated that on 27.3.2012, he was already continuing in judicial custody in connection with Dharhara P.S. Case No. 46 of 2004 in which he came to be acquitted on 6.6.2012. He has further submitted that as on 27.3.2012, the petitioner was also continuing in judicial custody in connection with Dharhara P.S. Case No. 72 of 2010 in which also he was acquitted by a judgment of the trial court dated 29.3.2012. In the same vein, he has also submitted that the petitioner was also continuing in judicial custody in connection with Dharhara P.S. Case no. 86/2010 wherein also he had been acquitted by a judgment dated 27.4.2012. Proceeding further, he has also demonstrated on the basis of the averments made in the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner in compliance of the order of this Court that as on the date of order of detention passed by the District Magistrate, Munger on 27.3.2012, he was also continuing in judicial custody in c