SAYYAD AZIM AHMED Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the Supreme Court in paragraph 12 (6) of the decision reported in AIR 1991 SC page 2261 (Abdul Sathar Ibrahim Manik Vs. Union of India and Ors.) has held that if the detenu is on bail at the time of the passing of the detention order, the bail application and the bail order, being vital documents, should be placed before the Detaining Authority and their copies supplied to the detenu and in the instant case it is common ground between the counsel for the parties that the detenu was on bail when the impugned detention order dated 29th June 1998 detaining him under sub section 1 of Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (No. LV of 1981) (Amendment 1996) was passed by the 2nd Respondent Mr. R. H. Mendonca, the Commissioner of Police, Brihan Mumbai, and neither the coy of the bail application was placed before the 2nd respondent nor its copy was supplied to the detenu the impugned detention order would stand vitiated on the vice of non application of mind, because a vital document was not placed before the detaining authority and also because as a copy of a vital document was not supplied to the detenu, his right to make an effective representation under Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India was impaired.

(2.) IN the result we allow this writ petition; quash and set aside the impugned detention order ; direct that the detenu, Nadin Ahmed Sayyed, shall be released forthwith unless wanted in some other case and make the rule absolute. Writ Petition allowed. .