TMI Blog1981 (3) TMI 251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on has been filed by a person named Kulwant Singh. 3. Each of the petitioners was detained on the 13th October, 1980 under the provisions of the National Security Ordinance which now stands replaced by the National Security Act. They were arrested on that date and on each of them a police officer served an order of detention along with the grounds on which it was based, both the documents being in English. It is the case of the State and the same has not been controverted before us, that the police officer effecting the service of the two documents explained to the concerned detenu in Hindi what their contents were. 4. Dr. N. M. Ghatate, learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged the detention of the two petitioners with the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not so conversant with the English language, in order to satisfy the requirements of the Constitution, the detenu must be given the grounds in a language which he can understand, and in a script which he can read, if he is a literate person. The Constitution has guaranteed freedom of movement throughout the territory of India and has laid down detailed rules as to arrest and detention. It has also, by way of limitations upon the freedom of personal liberty, recognised the right of the State to legislate for preventive detention, subject to certain safeguards in favour of the detained person, as laid down in clauses (4) and (5) of article 22. One of those safeguards is that the detained person has the right to be communicated the grounds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... who followed Hadibandhu's case, held that the communication of the grounds of detention in a language understood by the detenu was an essential requirement for the validity of a detention order which, in the absence of such requirement being fulfilled, would be repugnant to the provisions of article 22(5) of the Constitution and would thus stand vitiated. And that is a view which has been consistently held by this Court. 6. The facts with which we are here concerned, in so far as they are relevant to the decision of the point canvassed before us, are on all fours with those of the three cases cited above. As already pointed out, the grounds of detention were supplied to the two petitioners in the English language-a language with whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
