{"id":329397,"date":"2024-08-27T12:00:47","date_gmt":"2024-08-27T06:30:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=329397"},"modified":"2024-08-27T12:55:07","modified_gmt":"2024-08-27T07:25:07","slug":"coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench the only option: SC"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In a criminal appeal against a decision of the Kerala High Court whereby the appellant’s\/ detenu’s sister-in-law’s application was dismissed upholding the detention order of the detenus issued under Section 3<\/a> of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974<\/a> (“COFEPOSA”), the three Judge Bench of BR Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra and KV Viswanathan, JJ. allowed the appeals and quashed the detention orders along with the order of confirmation of the said detention orders. The Court held that when the Coordinate Bench of the same High Court based on same grounds of detention and on the basis of the same material, which was relied on by the detaining authority, had come to a considered conclusion that non-supply of certain documents had vitiated the right to make an effective representation of the detenus, another Coordinate Bench in the impugned decision could not have ignored the same.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/p>\n

In 2021, an unaccompanied baggage of A was seized with contraband gold weighing 14,763.30 grams valued at Rs. 7,16,16,768\/-. Statements of co-accused persons were recorded, whereby they admitted that the detenu who was residing in Dubai, UAE, was running a cargo handling and forwarding business and was scouting passengers who had unaccompanied cargo to be sent to India. It was stated that the detenu would send contraband gold concealed in compressors of refrigerators along with unaccompanied baggage. Detention orders under Section 3 of COFEPOSA were issued against the three co-accused persons including father-in-law, brother-in-law of detenu and Customs Cardholder. Subsequently, they challenged their respective detention orders by way of separate Writ Petitions filed before High Court. When detenu returned to India, he was arrested on 05-03-2022 and was served with detention order dated 24-08-2021, and grounds of detention were supplied on 07-03-2022.<\/p>\n

The detenu wrote letters to the Director General, Central Economic Intelligence Bureau (‘DG, CEIB’) and Joint Secretary COFEPOSA, seeking various documents that had not been provided to him, including the audio recordings of the voice messages pertaining to the WhatsApp conversations relied upon by the Detaining Authority. The Joint Secretary (COFEPOSA) rejected the request. The Central Government confirmed the detention order of the detenu for a period of one year from the date of detention. On 03-06-2022, the Division Bench of the High Court by a common judgment, allowed the three writ petitions filed by the co-accused persons opining that documents sought had been relied upon in the detention orders and the same ought to have been furnished to the detenus when they requested for the same. Hence, the non-supply had vitally affected the right of the detenus under Article 22(5)<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, therefore, the detention order was bad in law.<\/p>\n

The appellant’s challenge to the detention order dated 24-08-2021 along with the confirmation order came to be dismissed by a separate division Bench.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision<\/p>\n

The Court noted that in Nushath Koyamu<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>, 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 2847<\/a> relying upon this Court’s decision in State of Bombay<\/span> v. Atma Ram Shridhar Vaidya<\/span>, 1951 SCC 43<\/a> the Court said that the detaining authority ought to have furnished the materials upon which reliance was placed and refused to accept the authority’s submission that there was no duty to supply the documents to the detenus. In as much as the documents sought has been relied upon in the detention orders, the same ought to have been furnished to the detenus when they requested for the same. Hence, the High Court held that the non-supply has vitally affected the right of the detenus under Article 22(5)<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In the matter at hand, the Court noted that the detenu sought copies of the said WhatsApp chats, which were relied upon. However, the Division Bench of the High Court, while rejecting the case of the detenu, said that the detaining authority had arrived at a subjective satisfaction on the basis of various documents and that non-supply of the WhatsApp chats would not vitiate the detention order. Further, the Court noted that, the Division Bench held that the findings of the Coordinate Bench in Nushath Koyamu<\/span> (supra) were not applicable in the present case.<\/p>\n

Referring to Official Liquidator<\/span> v. Dayanand<\/span> (2008) 10 SCC 1<\/a>, wherein it was reiterated that disrespect to the constitutional ethos and breach of discipline have grave impact on the credibility of judicial institution and encourages chance litigation and that every citizen is under a duty to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions. Those who have been entrusted with the task of administering the system and operating various constituents of the State and who take oath to act in accordance with the Constitution and uphold the same, have to set an example by exhibiting total commitment to the constitutional ideals<\/span>, the Court laid down that when the Coordinate Bench of the same High Court based on same grounds of detention and on the basis of the same material, which was relied on by the detaining authority, had come to a considered conclusion that non-supply of certain documents had vitiated the right to make an effective representation of the detenus, another Coordinate Bench could not have ignored the same.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Court held that the Division Bench of the High Court while passing the impugned judgment and order should have followed the view taken by another Division Bench of the same High Court specifically when the grounds of detention and the grounds of challenge were identical in both the cases. In case, the Division Bench of the High Court was of the view that the earlier decision of the Coordinate Bench of the same High Court was not correct in law, the only option available to it was to refer the matter to a larger Bench.<\/p>\n

Thus, allowing the appeal the Court quashed and set aside the order of detention dated 24-08-2021 passed by the CEIB, COFEPOSA Wing and the order of confirmation of detention order dated 24-05-2022 passed by the CEIB, COFEPOSA.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

CASE DETAILS<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n
\n

Citation:<\/span>
2024 SCC OnLine SC 2057<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Appellants :<\/span>
Shabna Abdulla<\/p>\n

Respondents :<\/span>
Union of India<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case<\/p>\n

For Petitioner(s):<\/span>
Raghenth Basant, Sr. Adv.; Aanchal Tikmani, AOR; Kaushitaki Sharma, Adv.<\/p>\n

For Respondent(s):<\/span>
Nachiketa Joshi, Sr. Adv.; Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR; Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR; Anu K Joy, Adv.; Alim Anvar, Adv.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

CORAM :<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n

\"BR
BR Gavai, J.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\"Prashant
Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\"KV
KV Viswanathan, J.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Buy Constitution of India  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Constitution<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the matter at hand, the Division Bench of High Court upheld a detention order, which was quashed by a coordinate Bench of the same High Court, based on same grounds and material relied.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67517,"featured_media":329419,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[72485,72205,2886,44180,65688,34505,72486,5363,72487],"class_list":["post-329397","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-cofepossa","tag-conservation-of-foreign-exchange-and-prevention-of-smuggling-activities-act","tag-Illegal_Detention","tag-justice-br-gavai","tag-justice-kv-vishwanathan","tag-justice-prashant-kumar-mishra","tag-non-supply-of-documents","tag-supreme-court","tag-view-of-coordinate-bench"],"yoast_head":"\nCoordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored: Supreme Court<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Supreme Court held that Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench is the only option\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench the only option: SC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court held that Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench is the only option\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-08-27T06:30:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-08-27T07:25:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench the only option: SC\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/\",\"name\":\"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored: Supreme Court\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-08-27T06:30:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-08-27T07:25:07+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624\"},\"description\":\"Supreme Court held that Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench is the only option\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Coordinate Bench of High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench the only option: SC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-online-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored: Supreme Court","description":"Supreme Court held that Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench is the only option","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench the only option: SC","og_description":"Supreme Court held that Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench is the only option","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-08-27T06:30:47+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-08-27T07:25:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench the only option: SC","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/","name":"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored: Supreme Court","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-08-27T06:30:47+00:00","dateModified":"2024-08-27T07:25:07+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624"},"description":"Supreme Court held that Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench is the only option","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Coordinate Bench of High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Coordinate Bench\u2019s view of same HC cannot be ignored even if considered to be incorrect in law; Reference to larger bench the only option: SC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-online-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":330730,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/","url_meta":{"origin":329397,"position":0},"title":"\u2018Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\u2019: SC quashes detention order under COFEPOSA","author":"Editor","date":"September 13, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIn the matters pertaining to personal liberty of the citizens, the Authorities are enjoined with a constitutional obligation to decide the representation with utmost expedition. Each day\u2019s delay matters in such a case.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"detention order under COFEPOSA","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":97741,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/05\/rejection-of-one-ground-will-not-affect-the-detention-order-passed-on-multiple-grounds-under-cofeposa\/","url_meta":{"origin":329397,"position":1},"title":"Rejection of one ground will not affect the detention order passed on multiple grounds under COFEPOSA","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"January 5, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the matter relating to supply of the \u2018grounds\u2019 of detention to the detenue when the Court has passed the order of detention under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, the Court said that neither Section 3 of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":329580,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/29\/know-thy-judge-justice-prashant-kumar-mishra-supreme-court-legal-news-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":329397,"position":2},"title":"Know Thy Judge | Supreme Court of India: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, who started his legal career from the District Courts and then High Courts of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, was appointed as Supreme Court Judge on 18-5-2023.","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Justice-Prashant-Kumar-Mishra.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Justice-Prashant-Kumar-Mishra.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Justice-Prashant-Kumar-Mishra.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Justice-Prashant-Kumar-Mishra.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":245755,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/18\/written-intimation-of-hearing-just-before-commencement-of-video-conference-hearing-by-advisory-board-leads-to-sc-quashing-detention-of-man-in-a-gold-smuggling-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":329397,"position":3},"title":"Written intimation of hearing just before commencement of video conference hearing by Advisory Board leads to SC quashing detention of man in a gold smuggling case","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 18, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the case where the State Advisory Board had heard a detenu on video conference, without any sufficient prior intimation to the detenu for preparation or arrangement for such hearing, the 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, BR Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ \u00a0has set aside the Detention Order\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":328928,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/17\/sc-disposes-of-challenge-against-delhi-hc-decision-quashing-detention-orders-cofeposa-for-being-infructuous\/","url_meta":{"origin":329397,"position":4},"title":"[Detention Under COFEPOSA] SC disposes of challenge against Delhi HC\u2019s decision quashing detention orders for being infructuous by efflux of time","author":"Editor","date":"August 17, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The question of law which revolved around right of making representation being seriously jeopardized as detenus were supplied with various documents as parts of relied upon documents (\u2018RUDs\u2019) which are illegible, incomplete and not readable violating Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India read with Section 3 (3) of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"detention orders under COFEPOSA","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/detention-orders-under-COFEPOSA.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/detention-orders-under-COFEPOSA.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/detention-orders-under-COFEPOSA.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/detention-orders-under-COFEPOSA.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":280682,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/12\/30\/set-aside-detention-order-conservation-foreign-exchange-prevention-smuggling-activities-act-legal-news-legal-research-update\/","url_meta":{"origin":329397,"position":5},"title":"Failure and non-supply of legible\/translated copies of documents despite a request renders the order of detention illegal and bad in law; Delhi High Court sets aside the COFEPOSA detention order","author":"Editor","date":"December 30, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Detaining Authority gravely erred in relying upon the illegible documents which is equivalent to non-placement of translated-RUDs in a language which the detenu understands, which consequently vitiates the \u2018subjective satisfaction\u2019 arrived at by the Detaining Authority.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/329397","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67517"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=329397"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/329397\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/329419"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=329397"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=329397"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=329397"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}