A prisoner is liable to be detained continuously only in the event of a valid, legal, or judicial order authorizing the continuous detention.

The petitioner, who is the brother of the detenu, namely, Lenin alias Nithya Dharmananda who has been detained in the Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennal, has come forward with this petition seeking for the relief of direction to the second respondent to cause production of the body of the person Lenin alias Nithya Dharmananda now confined in Central Prison, Puzhal before this Honble Court and set him at liberty.

2. Mrs. K. Sumathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the detenu has been granted the relief of bail by this Court by the order dated 5-6-2012 in Crl. O. P. No. 11991/2012 for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 342, 323, 420 and 506(ii) IPC. It is contended that on receipt of the bail order, sureties has been executed on 7-6-2012 and on the same day, release order was sent from 11th Metropolitan Magistrate (In-charge Court Saidapet, Chennai) on the execution of the sureties and the same reached the Central Prison, Puzhal on the same day i.e., on 7-6-2012. It is further contended that inspite of receiving the release order after execution of the sureties, the jail authorities, namely, the second respondent refused and declined to release the detenu stating that the prison authorities already received B Warrant from the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi directing the prison authorities to produce the detenu on 2-7-2012. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that as the detenu has been granted the relief of bail and also executed the sureties and the jail authorities also received the release order from the concerned Magistrate and there is no legal or judicial order justifying the detention of the detenu in the prison, his continuous detention is illegal and unjustified as there is no extension of the remand period from any other Court legalizing the detention of the detenu. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court with this present petition with the above said prayer. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the following decisions :

(i) Ram Dass Ram v. State of Bihar and another reported in AIR 1987 Supreme Court 1333

(ii) Kattan @ Subramani v. State, Rep. by Inspector of Police, Avadi P. S. and another reported in 1992 (1) MWN (Cr.)/Mad

(iii) Division Bench decision of this Court dated 1-7-2010 passed in H. C. P. No. 1151/2010 (K. S. Muthuramalingam v. State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Commissioner Office, Coimbatore and another) and the provisions under Sections 3 and 6 of The Prisoners (Attendance in Courts) Act, 1955.

3. Mr. S. Shumugavelaytham, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners brother, namely, the detenu has been detained in the Central Prison, Puzhal in respect of his implication in a criminal case in Crime No. 782/2011 on the file of the first respondent for the offence under Sections 341, 342, 392, 323, 420 and 506 (ii) IPC. It is submitted that the detenu has been granted the relief of bail by this Court by the order dated 5-6-2012 in Cri. O. P. No. 11991/2012 and he has executed the sureties before the concerned Magistrate on 7-6-2012, but even before the execution of sureties, the jail authorities, namely, the second respondent received B Warrant from the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi on 6-6-2012, directing the prison authorities to produce the detenu on 2-7-2012 and on that ground, the detenu was not released by the second respondent. It is brought to the notice of this Court that in a similar situation, on the ground of failure of the production of the detenu before the concerned Court, the said Court imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and as such, apprehending such consequence, the second respondent has declined to release the detenu on the ground of receipt of B Warrant from the Varanasi Court.

4. We have given our careful and thoughtful consideration to the submissions of both sides and perused the