It is further stated that the.
The Advisory Board after companysidering the, materials placed before it relating to the detention of the petitioner including the represen tations made by him on March 17, 1971 and April 19, 1971, submitted its report on May 11, 1971 to the State Government stating that it is of opinion that there is sufficient cause for the detention of the petitioner.
The petitioner sent two representations dated March 17, and April 19, 1971 denying the allegations made in the grounds for passing the order of detention and pleaded that he was innocent.
The petitioner has challenged the order of detention on the ground that he has never companymitted any offence number has he been involved in any illegal activities as alleged in the grounds of detention.
That, on 2 2 71 at about 17.39 hours, you along with your associates, being armed with bombs, daggers etc.,
The State Government rejected the representations of the petitioner, but forwarded them to the Advisory Board for being companysidered.
In neither of these representations did the petitioner make a request that he should be provided an opportunity of being heard in person by the Advisory Board.
The State Government companysidered the report of the District Magistrate together with other materials placed before it and approved, on March 11, 1971 as required by S. 3 4 of the Act, the order of detention passed by the District Magistrate.
particulars having a bearing on the name.
On the same day, as required,by S. 3 5 the State Government sent the necessary report to the Central Government.
petitioner was arrested on March 5, 1971 and was served on the same day with the order of detention together with the, grounds for passing the order of detention.
32 of the Constitution of India for a writ in the nature of habeas companypus.
You created disturbance of the public order thereby.
205 of 1971.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
The petitioner was also informed that he is entitled to make a representation to the State Government against the order of detention and that such representation is to be addressed to the Assistant Secretary Home Special DEpartment, Government of West Bengal and forwarded through the Superintendent of Jail.
P. Mitra, G. S. Chatterjee for Sukumar Basu, for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidialingam, J This petition under Art.
Petition under Art.
Mayakrishnan, for the petitioner.
XIX of 1970 hereinafter to be referred as the Act , directing the detention of the petitioner.
He was also informed that under s. 11 of the Act, the Advisory Board shall, if so desired by him, hear him in person and that the petitioner must intimate the said desire to be heard in the representations that he may make to the State Government.
He was further informed that his case will be placed under s. 10 of the Act before, the Advisory Board within 30 days from the date of the order of detention.
The State Government passed an order on July 12, 1971 under S. 12 1 of the Act companyfirming the order of detention dated March 2, 1971 passed by the District Magistrate and directed that the petitioners detention shall be companytinued till the expiration of twelve months from the date of his detention.
32 of the Constitution challenges the validity of the order dated March 2, 1971 passed by the District Magistrate, 24 Pargana, in exercise of the powers companyferred on him under sub section 1 read with sub section 3 of S. 3 of the West Bengal Prevention of Violent Activities Act, 1970 Act No.
The State Government on April 3, 1971 placed the case of the petitioner before the Advisory Board.
He has admitted in these representations that he was arrested on March 5, 1971.
