David Annoussamy, J. — In this writ petition for habeas corpus, notice was ordered on 31-5-1988 returnable by 13-6-1988. On 12-7-1988 Public Prosecutor has taken notice and the matter was posted for counter to be filed on 2-8-1988. On that day, the matter was finally adjourned to 16-8-1988 for filing counter. On 16-8-1988 time was extended by two weeks as a last chance for filing counter. On 30-8-1988 the matter was directed to be posted on 13-9-1988 finally for filing counter. On 13-9-1988 the matter was directed to be posted for final disposal according to chronological order. Today it is found that no counter has been filed even subsequently.
2. Learned Public Prosecutor would seek further time to file counter. But the learned counsel for the petitioner would represent that the order of detention was passed on 28-2-1988 and that only about one month is left and that since the respondents have not filed counter despite several adjournments sought after and granted, the petition should be allowed. He placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in Mohd. Ibrahim Mohd. Sasin v. State Of Maharashtra . (1987 S.C.C(Cri.) 630) in which it was held as follows:
“Even though an opportunity was given to the State Government to defend its action as stated earlier it has not done so. In the circumstances, we feel that any further detention of the petitioner is unconstitutional. The respondent, State Government of Maharashtra is directed to release the petitioner forthwith. 3. In this case, we consider that considerable time has been given to the respondents to file counter and in spite of several adjournments no counter has been filed. As per the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court, further detention of the petitioner is unconstitutional.
4. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the order of detention is quashed.