1. Detenue has been placed under preventive detention by means of Gov­ernment Order No. Home/PB-V/2181/ 2007 dated 30.11.2007. The grounds on the basis of which the detaining author­ity arrived at subjective satisfaction about the detention of the detenue are contained in the grounds of detention, copy of which has been placed alongwith the present petition. Various grounds have been taken in the present petition to challenge the detention of the detenue. 2. Respondents have not filed their reply. Heard. Considered. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the material on the basis of which the detention has been ordered has not been supplied to the detenue due to which he could not make an ef­fective representation. 4. In Sophia Ghulam Mohammad Bham Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. AIR 1999 SC 3051 , the Supreme Court has observed as under:- "...The right to be communicated the grounds of detention flows from Ar­ticle 22(5) while the right to be sup­plied all the material on which the grounds are based flows from the right given to the detenue to make a representation can be made and the order of detention can be as­sailed only when all the grounds on which the order is based are com­municated to the detenue and the material on which those are bases are also disclosed and copies thereof are supplied to the person detained in his own language..." 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the perusal of the detention order would show that the respondents have while directing preventive deten­tion of the detenue resorted to Section-8(a-l)(b) of the Public Safety Act. The provisions, as contended by the learned counsel, are not applicable, as the detenue in the present case relates to regulating the continued presence of the detenue in the State whileas in the present case the detenue is not present in the State but detained at Central Jail, Jodhpur. 6. Section-8(a-l)(b) relates to the cases of the foreigners and the persons residing in the area of the State under the occupation of Pakistan. 6. Section-8(a-l)(b) relates to the cases of the foreigners and the persons residing in the area of the State under the occupation of Pakistan. Under these provisions, the Government may, if sat­isfied with respect to the person who is a foreigner or is residing in the area of the State under the occupation of Paki­stan, that with a view to regulating his continued presence in the State or with a view to making arrangements for his expulsion from the State, it is neces­sary so to do, make an order directing that such person be detained. 7. From the plain reading of the provision, it would appear that the Gov­ernment can resort to this provision only in the detenue is present in the State or with a view to make arrangement for his expulsion from the State. Since the detenue in the present case is not present in the State, the respon­dents cannot resort to this provision or direct preventive detention of the present detenue. 8. In view of this, I find the detaining authority has not duly complied with the provisions of law, which has caused prejudice to the detenue. 9. The petition is, therefore, allowed. Detention order No. Home/PB-V/2181/ 2007 dated 30.11.2007, impugned in the present petition is quashed. Respon­dents are directed to release the detenue Ayaz Ahmad Khokhar S/o Mohammad Sideeq Khokhar R/o Bhawlanagar Faisal Coloney, Street-13 House No. 113, Police Station City Punjab, Paki­stan, forthwith provided he is not in­volved in any other case.