The Gauhati High Court has directed the Assam government to release and pay Rs 50,000 as compensation to a man who has been held under preventive detention for eight months as against the stipulated period of three months, Live Law reported.

A division bench of Chief Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Mitali Thakuria also directed the Assam State Legal Services Authority to get a report from all prisons in the state on the status of those who have been detained under preventive detention laws and take “remedial measures” if a similar case is found. The order was passed on May 11 and made public on Monday.

Preventive detention allows the government to detain individuals before they have committed an offence. The authorities are allowed to detain a person for a maximum of three months, unless an advisory board, before the expiration of the detention period, feels that there is “sufficient cause” for detention. Once the opinion of the advisory board is received, the state government is under an obligation to pass an order of confirmation or revocation of the initial order of detention.

In the current case, the High Court was hearing a plea filed by the sister of Sukumar Das, who has been kept in detention since August 24, 2022. He was held under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988.

The petitioner had challenged his detention on various grounds, including “non-application of mind” and “non-supply of relevant documents”.

The petitioner had also informed the court that no order of confirmation of the detention order was served to Das.

At the last hearing in the case, the court had asked the Assam government whether an order authorising Das’ detention beyond three months was passed.

At the hearing on May 11, the state government counsel informed the court that the order was “under process”.

“The situation in the case at hand is alarming, to say the least, because the detenu [Das] has been kept behind bars for a period of more than eight months without the initial detention order being confirmed,” the bench said. “Every moment of custody of the detenu beyond the period of three months…amounts to illegal detention pure and simple.”