Delay in disposal of a detenu's representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India violates the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty.

The impugned order of detention dated 10.4.99 passed by the District Magistrate, Dhubri in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (2) of section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980, has been assailed in this Habeas Corpus petition. The detenu Shri Prasanta Kumar Roy @ Jitu Sankar @ Samsul Haque @ Jayanta Sirigh was ordered to be detained by the District a Magistrate, Dhubri in exercise of powers under section 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 by the aforesaid order. The order of detention states that the above order is passed with a view to prevent the detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. At the time of his detention the detenu was lodged at Dhubri Jail in connection with number of criminal cases against the detenu. The grounds of detention as required under the law were & furnished to the detenu. The detenu submitted his representation to the State Govt on 26.4.1999 through the Superintendent of District Jail, Dhubri. The detenu in his representation raised numerous grounds of attack against his order of detention. In the affidavit of the respondent No.l the State of Assam and the respondent Nd4 the Superintendent of District Jail, Dhubri it was stated that on the same day the respondent No.4 forwarded the representation to the Govt by registered post. The representation reached the State Govt on 3.5.99. The representation was finally rejected by the appropriate authorities on 12th May, 1999. The formal notification of the rejection of the representation was issued on 14.5.99. The State Govt also forwarded a copy of the representation to the Central Govt by Speed Post on 4.5.99 which was also rejected by the Central Govt on 4.6.99.

2. On behalf of the detenu Mr. DK Mishra, learned Senior Advocate has raised various grounds of attack against the order of detention. The counsel very strenuously urged that the grounds of detention are vague, nonexistent and suffers from the vice of non application of mind. The counsel further urged that there has been inordinate delay in disposing of the representation made by the detenu and as such there has been a breach of Article 22 (5) of the Constitution. Mr. Mishra, the learned senior counsel urged that the detention order is liable to be struck down on this short ground alone.

3. The respondents on the other hand, pleaded and contended that the detenu as a member of ULFA, an organisation declared as unlawful, indulged in violent activities and directly involved in bomb explosions, killing of police personnels and others. The respondents also urged that the full particulars regarding date, time and place and a few of the instance of anti-national activities were clearly cited in the grounds of detention. The respondents further stated that respondents were fully aware of the fact that the detenu was in custody at the time of passing of the detention order and despite that the said order of detention was passed keeping in mind all aspects of the matter.

4. Numerous grounds have been raised in this writ petition assailing the said order of detention. We are, however, not inclined to go into all these questions raised since this petition can be disposed of on the limited ground of violation of the rights guaranteed under Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India.

5. We are of the view that the contention raised by Mr. Mishra that there has been a delay in disposal of the representation of the petitioner and the said delay has not been properly explained and therefore the continuous detention of the detenu should be held to be illegal as violative of Constitutional guarantee under Article 22 (5). In that view of the matter we are not inclined to refer in detail the other contentions raised by the petitioner. We, however, make it clear that prima facie we are satisfied that the grounds are neither vague nor devoid of particulars nor the same can be said to be non-existent. As we are striking down the orders for th