IMPORTANT POINT
Documents which detaining authority relied on while passing detention order are required to be supplied in a language which detenu would be able co follow and it must be supplied irrespective of fact that detenu was aware of contents thereof.

JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha. J. -This application for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of habeas corpus has been filed for quashing of an order of detention dated 16-6-1999 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India. Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue in terms of provisions of Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 1985 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as the said Act).

2. Before considering the matter on merit we may refer to the following chronological events.

3. The petitioner was arrested by the Detective Department. Calcutta Police on an allegation that he was carrying cash of Rs. 35,300/- in Case No. 18 dated 24-1-1997 under Sections 21/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 1985. The petitioner was granted bail on 8-8-1997. According to the petitioner he and his wife were arrested from their house at Dum Dum by the Narcotic Control Bureau on 8-11-1998 and as they were not produced before an appropriate Court, they filed two applications on 9-11-1998 and 11-11-1998 one before the learned 12th Additional District and Sessions Judge. Alipore and another before the learned Special Judge, whereupon the learned Special Judge made an order on 9-11-1998 directing that a proper application be made before a proper Forum. The petitioner in connection with the earlier case was to appear before the learned Special Judge at Alipore on 11-11-1998 and on that date again an application was filed stating that he had already been arrested by the police and. therefore, was unable to appear. On 12-11-1998 the petitioner was produced in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 42 of 1998 and he was released on bail on 8-1-1999 by the learned City Sessions Court acting as Special Judge. The petitioner had appeared before the said Court on 21-1-1999. Admittedly, an application for cancellation of bail in terms of Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is pending consideration before this Court. The Zonal Director, attached to the Directorate General. Narcotic Control Bureau made a proposal on 26-2-1999 for the detention of the petitioner inter alia, stating. "Please find enclosed a proposal in ten sets for detention of Jamat All Mondal @ Tapan Das @ Mejo, who was arrested with 1 kg. of heroin on 11-11-1998 on Strand Road, Calcutta, opposite to the office of Shipping Corporation of India, Calcutta. The proposal contains a compendium, history sheet and information under specific Performa. The proposed under detenu is at present on bail. In earlier occasion also, he managed to get bail in another case of 2.4 kgs. of heroin booked by Calcutta police. It is, therefore, necessary to detain him under PITNDPS Act in order to prevent him from illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs. There is every possibility of his absconding. Alongwith the said letter information in specific proforma had been given wherein it was alleged. "Persuant to a specific information, officers of NCB. Calcutta seized 1 kg., heroin recovered from the side box of black coloured YAMAHA motor cycle bearing No. WB-O1-L-4175 of Jamat Ali Mondal. The above Jamat Ali Mondal was intercepted on Strand Road opposite to Shipping Corporation and search was conducted by I.O. of NCB in presence of Gazetted Officer and two independent witnesses on the spot. Sri Jamat Ali Mondal in his voluntary statement confessed the recovery of heroin from his possession. In his written statement he confessed that he was engaged in this business from five years back-14, Language or script known to the proposed detenu Bengali-15. Jail where to be detained, if so, accepted: Presidency Jail, Alipore Calcutta (W.B.)".

4. The authority issued the order of detention on 16-6-1999 which was served upon the petitioner on 2-7-1999. On 3rd July, 1999, the petitioner had again filed an application stating that he, had been arrested without assigning any reason. A similar application was again filed o