Eusoffe Abdoolcader SCJ:

The primary issue for determination in this appeal is the question whether a quantitative restraint of the liberty of an individual by way of his confinement within a given perimeter can attract the constitutional writ of habeas corpus.

The brief facts of this matter are that the appellant was arrested under an order made on 21 June 1984 by the Deputy Minister of Home Affairs under the Restricted Residence Enactment (FMS Cap 39) (`the Enactment') and detained initially in police custody and then in prison. The grounds of his detention were that as a registered dealer in commodity trading he had in 1983 cheated the public by giving false promises and making false declarations as a result of which many investors sustained considerable financial loss. Representations were made by and on his behalf against this order but to no avail and on 27 August 1984 the Deputy Minister made another order under s. 2(ii) of the Enactment requiring the appellant to reside in the town of Gua Musang in Kelantan for a period of three years from the date of the order, and also a further order under s. 2A(i) of the Enactment directing him to be placed under police supervi