SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND A. VARADARAJAN, JJ.
Virendra Singh, Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Respondent.
Criminal Writ Petn. No. 6274 of 1980, D/-6-1-1981.
Constitution of India - Article 22 (5) - This petition has been filed by the son-in-law of the detenu praying that detenu may be released as constitutional safeguards contained in Art. 22 (5) of Constitution have not been complied with - Admittedly, order of detention was passed on 9-10-1980 and grounds were supplied to detenu on 1-11-1980 when he was arrested but without documents and materials which were supplied on 5-11-1980 - Detenu made a representation on 13-11-1980 which was disposed of on 13-12-1980 - Held, Moreover, order of detention suffers from another infirmity, namely, that representation made by detenu was disposed of by the detaining authority more than a month after representation was sent to it - No reasonable explanation for this delay has been given which violates the constitutional safeguards enshrined under Art. 22 (5) and makes continued detention of detenu void - For these reasons, therefore, we allow this petition and direct detenu to be released forthwith - Petition allowed.
Judgment
ORDER:- This petition has been filed by the son-in-law of the detenu praying that the detenu may be released as the constitutional safeguards contained in Art. 22 (5) of the Constitution have not been complied with. Admittedly, the order of detention was passed on 9-10-1980 and the grounds were supplied to the detenu on 1-11-1980 when he was arrested but without the documents and materials which were supplied on 5-11-1980. The detenu made a representation on 13-11-1980 which was disposed of on 13-12-1980. In this case as the documents and the materials forming the basis of the order of detention had not been supplied to the detenu along with the order of detention when the same was served on him, the order is rendered void as held by this Court in Smt. Icchu Devi Choraria v. Union of India, (1980) 4 SCC 531 and in Smt. Shalini Soni v. Union of India, (1980) 4 SCC 544. Moreover, the order of detention suffers from another infirmity, namely, that the representation made by the detenu was disposed of by the detaining authority more than a month after the representation was sent to it. No reasonable explanation for this delay has been given which violates the constitutional safeguards enshrined under Art. 22 (5) and makes the continued detention of the detenu void. For these reasons, therefore, we allow this petition and direct the detenu to be released forthwith.
Petition allowed.
For Citation : AIR 1981 SC 1909
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.