JUDGMENT - SAHAI VISHNU, J.:---Through this writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who styles herself as mother of the detenue-Rajesh Mangal Singh, has impugned the detention order dated 18-5-1999, passed by the first respondent Mr. R.H. Mendonca, Commissioner of Police, Brihan Mumbai, detaining the detenue under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 (No. L.V. of 1981) (Amendment 1996). 2. The detention order along with the grounds of detention also dated 18-5-1999 was served on 18-5-1999 itself on the detenue. True copies of the detention order and grounds of detention order are annexed as Annexure A and B respectively to this writ petition. 3. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Although in this writ petition Mr. U.N. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioner has pleaded a large number of grounds numbered as ground No. 7-A to 7-G but, since in our judgment, this writ petition deserves to succeed on ground No. 7-B. We are neither adverting to other grounds raised in the petition nor to the prejudicial activities of the detenue contained in grounds of detention. Ground No. 7-B in short is that since illegible or partly legible copies of some original documents were supplied to the detenue, his right to make a representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India has been impaired. 4. Mr. U.N. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the law requires that not only the translated copies of documents supplied to the detenue should be legible but the originals should also be legible. He has urged that this is necessary because, unless legible copies of the original documents are given, the detenue would not be able to ascertain whether the translation is faithful and correct. To support his submission, Mr. Tripathi invited our at tention to paras 10 and 11 of the Division Bench decision of our Court, reported in 1983 Cri.L.J. 1246, (Moosa Velliat Petitioner v. The Assistant Secretary, Government of Maharashtra and others, Respondents)1. 5. Mr. To support his submission, Mr. Tripathi invited our at tention to paras 10 and 11 of the Division Bench decision of our Court, reported in 1983 Cri.L.J. 1246, (Moosa Velliat Petitioner v. The Assistant Secretary, Government of Maharashtra and others, Respondents)1. 5. Mr. S.G. Deshmukh, learned Counsel for the respondents true to his customary fairness, admits that the original of the document at page 35 of the compilation which is bail application and bail order in a case under sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act, relating to ground No. 4(a) to 4(a)(iv) of the grounds of detention, is illegible in part. 6. In our view, on account of the circumstance, mentioned in paragraph 5, above, the detenue was prevented from ascertaining whether the translated copy given to him was a faithful translation of the original, and thus was deprived of his right of making a representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India. We wish to emphasise that in the obligation of the respondents to furnish copies of original documents is implicit the obligation that such copies should be legible. 7. Since the copy of the original bail application and the bail order was illegible in part, in our view, the detenues right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India was impaired. 8. Accordingly, we allow this writ petition; quash the detention order dated 18-5-1999; direct that the detenue Rajesh Mangal Singh be released forthwith unless wanted in some other case; and make the rule absolute. Writ petition allowed. -----