The violation of a detenue's rights under Article 22(5) leads to the quashing of detention orders when there is inordinate delay in considering representations.

ORDER

The petitioner who is the brother of the detenue Mahammed Riyaz S/o P.Mayyadi (hereinafter referred to as 'the detenue'), has preferred this writ petition seeking for the following reliefs:

a) A Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus by quashing of the order of detention dated 10.02.2022 passed by respondent No.2 in No.MAG/02/MGC/2022, which is produced at Annexure-A and Anenxure-A1

b) A Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus by quashing the approval order dated 17.02.2022 passed by the respondent No.1 in H.D. 53 SST 2022, Bengaluru which is produced at Annexure-C in the interest of jistice.

c) A Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus by quashing the confirmation order dated 29.03.2022 passed by the respondent No.1 in H.D. 53 SST 2022,Bengaluru which is produced at Annexure-F in the interest of justice..

d) A Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to set at the detenue Mohammed Nawaz @ Pinky Nawaz @ Nawaz at liberty by releasing him from prison forthwith, in the interest of justice.

e) Any other order or direction may be issued as consequential orders, in the interest of justice."

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also the learned State Public Prosecutor on behalf of the respondents.

3. Brief facts of the case as revealed from the records that may be necessary for the purpose of disposal of this petition are, respondent no.2 has passed an order of detention dated 10.02.2022 under Section 3 (1) & (2) of the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video or Audio Pirates Act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act') against the detenue on the ground that the detenue who is involved in number of criminal cases and who is released on bail, has continued his anti-social activities which has caused disturbance of public order, and therefore, to control his activities and to prevent the detenue from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it has become necessary to pass the detention order against him. The said order of detention was followed by a corrigendum dated 15.02.2022 and the detention of the detenue was shifted to Bengaluru Central Jail from Mangaluru District Jail. Thereafter, the State Government, on 17.02.2022 approved the detention order passed by respondent no.2 and the copy of the approval order was served on the detenue on 18.02.2022 along with the paper book which contained the documents relied upon by the competent authority while passing the order of detention.

4. In compliance of Section 10 of the Act, respondent no.1 had placed the order and the grounds of detention before the Advisory Board on 23.02.2022. The detenue had submitted a representation against the order of detention on 07.03.2022 to the Detaining Authority, State Government and the Advisory Board through the Chief Superintendent, Central Jail, Bengaluru. The Detaining Authority has rejected the said representation on 15.03.2022. The Advisory Board after hearing the detenue and after referring to the considering the representation of the detenue, has submitted its report to the State Government on 23.03.2022 opining that there was sufficient cause for the detention of the detenue and on receipt of such a report, the State Government in exercise of its power under Section 12 of the Act has passed a confirmation order on 29.03.2022. The petitioner has, thereafter, filed the present writ petition o