These are applications under section 491, Criminal Procedure Code, to issue directions in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the release of the petitioners who were detained under the Madras Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1947 (Act 1 of 1947). As these petitions raised some common questions of law, we thought it convenient to hear and dispose of these questions before considering the merits of each application. The orders of detention under the Act in all the petitions except four, Cr.M.Ps. Nos. 1645 and 1651 of 1949, 1527 and 1611 of 1949 were passed after 12th March, 1948, and according to the petitioners on the date on which the orders of detention in these cases were passed, the Madras Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1947, ceased to be in force and that therefore the orders of detention were without authority and were illegal.

The Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1947 (Madras Act 1 of 1947), hereinafter called “the Act” in the course of this judgment, received the assent of the Governor-General on the 11th March, 1947, and was first published in the Fort St. George Gazette on the 12th March, 1947. Under section 1, sub-clause (3) of the Act, it came into force at once. Under sub-clause (4) it remains in force for a period of one year; but under that sub-clause the Provincial Government is empowered from time to time by notification in the Fort St. George Gazette to extend the continuance of this Act for a further period or periods not exceeding one year in the aggregate if in their opinion it is expedient so to do. On the expiry of the Act the provisions of section 8 of the Madras General Clauses Act are made applicable, as if the Act had then been repealed. Before the expiry of the period of one year from the commencement of the Act the Provincial Government by a notification in the Fort St. George Gazette extended the duration of the Act for a further period of one year commencing from 12th March, 1948. [Vide G.O. No. 446 (General), dated 27th February, 1948, published in the Fort St. George Gazette of 2nd March, 1948]. This notification, it would be noticed, was issued before the expiry of the period of one year from the commencement of the Act. Sub-clause (4) of section 1 of the Act was amended by the Madras Maintenance of Public Order (Amendment) Act, 1948 (Act XVII of 1948) by substituting for the words “for a further period or periods not exceeding one year in the aggregate” the words “for a further period or periods not exceeding three years in the aggregate”. This Amending Act received the assent of the Governor-General on the 17th August, 1948, which was first published in the Fort St. George Gazette, Extraordinary on the 20th August, 1948. The life of the Act was further extended by another notification for a period of one more year from 12th March, 1949. [Vide G.O. Ms. No. 594 (Public General), dated 4th March, 1949] by reason of this further extension the Act continues in force, if the notifications are valid, till 12th March, 1950. The orders of detention now in question were made during the period commencing from 12th March, 1948. In Jatindranath Gupta v. Province of Bihar1 , the Federal Court held that the power delegated to the Provincial Government to extend the duration of the Bihar Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1947, on a resolution passed by the Legislative Assembly and agreed to by the Bihar Legislative Council, with or without modifications, was invalid, and that the said Act ceased to have operation on the termination of the period of one year from the commencement of that Act. This decision was pronounced on the 28th May, 1949. Following the decision of the Federal Court the Calcutta High Court declared in K.K.B. Canadia v. B.J.H. Warden2 , that a similar power of extending the life of an Act by a resolution of the Provincial Legislature contained in the West Bengal Security Act, 1948, was invalid. This decision was pronounced on the 27th June, 1949. After these two decisions the Govern