- (1.)IN this petition for habeas corpus it has been alleged that the petitioner was a permanent resident of village Chajjala District Poonch in the Jammu and Kashmir State and thus the petitioner was entitled to all fundamental rights laid down in the Constitution of India, It has been alleged that the petitioner was detained and lodged in the Central Jail, Jammu, under the Public Safety Act, 1978, by virtue of an order dated 30.12 1982 issued by the District Magistrate, Jammu. It has been claimed by the petitioner that the grounds of detention were all false and concocted by the police concerned on the instigation of some influential person. The petitioner has denied that he was working as an enemy agent and has submitted he may be released.
(2.)I have heard both the learned counsel for the parties with regard to this petition.
(3.)MR . G. R. Asgar, Amicus Curie has referred me to a judgment reported in A I.R. 1982 S.C. 1500 and has read extensively from the judgment. He has, in particular, referred to Para 10 of this judgment. The relevant portion of which is quoted as below: -
"All documents, statements and other materials incorporated in the grounds by reference and which have influenced the mind of the detaining authority in arriving at the requisite subjective satisfaction must be furnished to the detenue along with the grounds or in any event not later than five days ordinarily and in the exceptional circumstances and for reasons to be recorded in writing not later than 15 days from the date of his detention and secondly, all such material must be furnished to him in a script or language which he understands and failure to do either of the two things would amount to a breach of the two duties cast on the detaining authority under Art. 22 (5) of the Constitution.

The learned C:G.A. has also referred to this very Judgment of the Supreme Court and also to the last Para of AIR. 1969 S C. 323. I have considered the arguments and have perused the relevant portions read before me from the above judgments.

In my view the judgment referred to by the amicus curae was applicable to this case as no copies of the documents appear to have been handed over to the petitioner in the language he understood i e. Gojri or Urdu. As such it is felt by the court that his detention was illegal and it is, therefore, ordered that the detenue should be immediately released from the detention.