The detaining authority is obliged to forward all subsequent material having a bearing on the matter to the Government and to the Advisory Board. Failure to do so vitiates the detention.

RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J.

This petition, filed by one Vellanai Pandian is for the issue of a writ of habeas corpus for quashing the order of detention dated 10-12-1982 passed by the first respondent against the petitioners cousin P. Gandhi the detenu herein, under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act XIV of 1982) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) rear with the orders issued by the Government in G.O.Ms. 25. Prohibition and Excise Department dated 18-1-1982, as amended by sub-section (2) of S. 8 of the Act, and confirmed by the second respondent as per order in G.O.Ms. 58 dated 27-1-1983 by which it was directed that the detenu be kept in detention for a period of twelve months from the date of his detention.

2. The ground on which the impugned order is based is that the Inspector of Police, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Tirunelveli, with his party, while conducting a prohibition raid at Ullar, on 24-10-1982 at about 11 a.m., found the detenu coming near a hillock known as Karuvattupparai carrying a plastic can which on a check was found to contain 15 litres of illicit distilled arrack, that the can was seized and the detenu was arrested and that a case in P.E.W. Crime No. 3130/82 under S. 4(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act was registered. Two samples of 500 ml. of arrack were taken. One of the sample bottles sent to the Assistant Director and Assistant Chemical Examiner. Regional Forensic Laboratory, Tirunelveli, on analysis was detected to contain atropine, a toxic element of datura. That apart, the Inspector examined two persons, viz., (1) one Panneer and (2) one S. Gurusami Pandian, both of Royagiri, who stated that they purchased spurious arrack from the detenu on 15-10-1982 and 20-10-1982 respectively and that both of them, after consuming the said arrack, experienced irritation in their throats, vomitting and purging, followed by blurring of vision, and that they had their treatment locally and they could not attend to their normal work. The Inspector also examined the Tutor in Forensic Medicine of the Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital who has opined that the consumption of arrack mixed with datura could affect the human system and that if one consumes large quantities, it is likely to cause death in the ordinary course of nature if no treatment is available. The first respondent being satisfied, on the basis of the above material, that the detenu was engaged in selling illicit liquor which is likely to cause widespread danger to life and public health, passed the impugned order of detention with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The copy of the order of detention was served on the detenu on 13-12-1982 along with the grounds of detention and other materials. The Government, on receipt of the detailed report of the first respondent dated 13-12-1982 as required under Section 3(3) of the Act, along with the grounds of detention and other materials, approved the order of detention on 20-12-1982 and a copy of the same was served on the detenu on 23-12-1982 under acknowledgment. Meanwhile, the detenu made his representation dated 16-12-1982, which was received by the Government on 23-12-1982. The case was referred to the Advisory Board on 22-12-1982. A copy of the representation of the detenu was forwarded to the Advisory Board on 23-12-1982 itself, on which date the Government received it. The parawise remarks of the first respondent on the representation of the detenu were called for on 23-12-1982 itself. On 5-1-1983 the first respondent sent his parawise remarks to the second respondent which thereafter rejected the representation of the detenu on 17-1-1983. The Advisory Board considered the case of the detenu on 18-1-1983 and after considering all the materials and the written and oral representations of the detenu, was una