Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench, allowing the habeas corpus petition filed by respondent No.1. In the writ petition before the High Court the order of the District Magistrate Tamenglong passed in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (in short the Act) read with Home Departments Order No.17(1)/49/80-S(Pt, dated 31.5.2005 was challenged. Though several grounds were urged in support of the application, the High Court accepted the stand that there was unexplained delay in disposing of the representation made. It is to be noted that counter-affidavit had been filed giving details of the steps taken after the receipt of the representation. It was explained that some time was taken to obtain the view of the sponsoring authority. The High Court held that the views of the sponsoring authority were not necessary to be taken and, therefore, the delay had not been properly explained. Accordingly the order of detention was quashed.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the view expressed by the High Court is clearly contrary to the views expressed by this Court in several cases.;