The Calcutta Law Journal - Reports of Cases Decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on Appeals from India by the Federal Court and by the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal July to December 1944

4' The mere fact that the detinue challenges the factum or the bona fides of the order or the fact that the Officers of the Government jmust naturally bin possession of information on the subject is got proof to the contrary " so as to make it incumbent on the Government to adduce evidence in support of the order. [...] 3 of the Ordinance is only a repetition of the language of S. 2(i) of the Defence of India Act and that Act begins by referring to the proclamation of the Governor-General under S. yo2 of the Consttution Act to the effect that the security of India is threatened by the war. [...] It was urged that as the detenue challenged the bona fades of the order and as the reasons and circumstances relating thereto were wholly within the knowledge of the officers of Goverment it was incumbent upon the Crown to examine these officers to establish the bona fide character of the order alnd that as they have not been examined the Cilia must draw the inference that the order was not:ma [...] The mere fact that the detenue challenges the factum or the bona fides of the order or the fact that the officers of Goverment must naturally be in possession of information on the subject cannot be said to be "proof to the contrary" so as to make it incumbent on the Government to adduce evidence in support of the order. [...] It.was finally contended that as the previous order of this Court directed an enquiry into the validity of the detention under the order of the rgth March r942 the decision of the High Court must be limited to that question and that it was not open to the High Court to base its decision on the subsequent order of the 3rd July 1944.