T. JAYARAMA CHOUTA, J.

The petitioner Ouchakalai, who is the brother-in-law of detenu Logamani s/o Kasipuli Thevar has filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate order or direction in the nature of a writ calling for the records of the first respondent, i.e., Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Prohibition and Excise Department, Madras made in and relating to Letter No. 7930/P & amp; E XV/95 dated 23-3-1995 and quash the same and set at liberty the detenu Logamani, presently undergoing detention in Central Prison, Madurai under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (Central Act 46 of 1988) (hereinafter referred to as "Act")

2. The habeas corpus petition was admitted and notices were ordered to respondents on 9-5-1995. The respondents were served with the notices and are being represented

3. Necessary facts which could be gathered from the grounds of detention for the purpose of disposal of this habeas corpus petition are narrated here : On 27-11-1994 at 21.00 hrs. one S. P. Ramamoorthy, Inspector of Police, Narcotic Intelligence Bureau, C.I.D. (hereinafter called as N.I.B. C.I.D.) Dindigul received reliable information and proceeded to Jayanthi Colony, Kottapatty with police party and the informant, secured some witnesses, reached door No. 2/95A, Ward No. 1 belonging to one Paraman and found the house was locked from inside and when the door was opened from inside, the party found storage of some gunny bags which on enquiry revealed to be containing ganja. The detenu and four others were searched and their statements were recorded and after completing all the legal formalities, they were arrested after seizing the said ganja in the presence of mahazar witnesses. A case in Dindigul N.I.B. C.I.D. Cr. No. 77 of 1994 under Section 20(b)(i) of the Act was registered against five persons including the detenu. After completing all the necessary requirements the Secretary, first respondent has passed the detention order on 23-3-1995 by exercising his powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the Act detaining the detenu in custody in the Central Prison, Madras which is the subject matter of this habeas corpus petition

4. In support of the petition, the petitioner has sworn to an affidavit. In the said affidavit, the petitioner has stated that his brother-in-law Logamani has been detained in pursuant to an order of detention issued by the first respondent in Letter No. 7930/P & amp; E XV/95 dated 23-3-1995 under the Act. According to the petitioner, the detenu is an ordinary coolie and he earns his livelihood by taking cattle and livestocks like sterile cows and bulls to Kerala. He had never been involved in any prejudicial activity at any time earlier. He has denied the allegation on the grounds that the detenu along with three others went to Andhra Pradesh, purchased ganja and brought them in gunny bags. He denied the fact that the detenu had been to Andhra Pradesh at all. The petitioner further stated that in connection with the case, a complaint had been filed by the Inspector of Police, N.I.B., C.I.D., long earlier to the passing of the order of detention and in pursuance to the said complaint, charge sheet was filed and the matter was posted for orders when the present order of detention has been passed. The said fact has not been disclosed in the detention order and hence, the failure to apprise the detaining authority of these aspects has clearly vitiated the satisfaction

5. The main grounds raised in the habeas corpus petition are non-mentioning of relevant and important materials in the grounds of detention and if these were revealed in the said grounds the detaining authority would not have made the order of detention and the failure to consider these aspects has vitiated the satisfaction. The next ground of attack was there was absolutely no necessity or justification in passing the order of preventive detention in as muc