{"id":330730,"date":"2024-09-13T12:30:21","date_gmt":"2024-09-13T07:00:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=330730"},"modified":"2024-09-18T11:37:38","modified_gmt":"2024-09-18T06:07:38","slug":"failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\u2019: SC quashes detention order under COFEPOSA"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In a criminal appeal by the detenu’s wife against the Kerala High Court’s decision, whereby the appellant wife’s habeas corpus petition for production of the detenu, who was detained for the offences under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974<\/a>, the three Judge Bench of BR Gavai<\/span>*, Prashant Kumar Mishra and KV Viswanathan, JJ., quashed and set aside the judgment and order of the High Court and also the order passed by the Joint Secretary (COFEPOSA). The order passed by the Under Secretary, Government of India confirming the detention order of the detenu was also quashed and set aside and the detenu was directed to be released forthwith.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/p>\n

The detention order dated 31-08-2023 was passed by the Detaining Authority under Section 3(1) of the COFEPOSA, thereby directing detention of the detenu to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the augmentation of foreign exchange in future.<\/p>\n

The detenu was taken into custody on 02-09-2023<\/p>\n

Vide order dated 31-07-2024, the Court allowed the present appeal; quashed and set aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court, and the order passed by the Joint Secretary (COFEPOSA) which confirmed the detention order of the detenu.<\/p>\n

Grounds for challenge to the detention order<\/p>\n

1. Whether the non-supply of the statements of A, which were relied upon by the Detaining Authority while arriving at its subjective satisfaction affected the right of the detenu to make an effective representation under Article 22(5)<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Referring to the catena of judgments, the Court noted that in unequivocal terms, it has been held that the constitutional requirements under Article 22(5)<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a> are twofold:<\/p>\n

(1) the Detaining Authority must, as soon as practicable after the detention communicate to the detenu the grounds on which the order of detention has been made, and<\/p>\n

(2) the Detaining Authority must afford the detenu the earliest opportunity of making the representation against the order of detention. The Court also noted that it has been recorded that the right is to make an effective representation and when some documents are referred to or relied on in the grounds of detention, without copies of such documents, the grounds of detention would not be complete. The Court also noted that it has been laid down that it is immaterial whether the detenu already knew about their contents or not.<\/p>\n

Hence, the Court reiterated that the detenu has the right to be furnished with the grounds of detention along with the documents so-referred to or relied on and failure or delay in furnishing those documents would amount to denial of the right to make an effective representation.<\/span><\/p>\n

Further, the Court while clarifying the said stand, reiterated that it is not necessary to furnish copies of every document to which a casual or passing reference may be made and which are not relied upon by the Detaining Authority in making the order of detention. However, failure to furnish copies of such document\/documents, relied on by the Detaining Authority which would deprive the detenu of making effective representation would certainly amount to a violation of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 22(5)<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

While examining the grounds for detention order in the instant matter, which led the detaining authority to arrive at its subjective satisfaction that the detenu was engaged in activities which adversely affected the augmentation of foreign exchange resources of the country.<\/p>\n

The Court on perusal of A’s statements and upon noting that B’s statements were also taken into consideration by the detaining authority, which also established that A was a vital link for transactions between B and the detenu, said that A’s statements were ‘not just a casual or a passing reference’<\/span>. On the contrary, the said statements formed the basis for arriving at a subjective satisfaction by the detaining authority.<\/p>\n

The Court also clarified the distinction between the ‘detention order passed on various grounds’ and the ‘detention order passed on one ground relying on various materials’, saying that if the detention order is passed on one ground taking into consideration factual aspects, the question would be as to whether non-supply of the material containing the factual aspects relied on by the detaining authority would vitiate the detention order or not.<\/p>\n

Answering the question that, though the grounds of detention could be severed, whether the materials which have been relied on by the detaining authority for arriving at its subjective satisfaction could also be severed, the Court opined that the documents forming the basis of the material facts, relied on by the authority and taken into consideration to form a chain of events could not be severed, and the High Court was not justified in coming to a finding that despite eschewing certain material taken into consideration by the authority, the detention order could be sustained by holding that the authority would have arrived at such a subjective satisfaction even without such material.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Court concluded the answer to issue (1) in affirmative, holding that non-supply of the statements of A, affected the right of the detenu to make an effective representation under Article 22(5)<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, hence, the detention was vitiated on the said ground.<\/p>\n

2. Whether non-receipt of the representation and the delay in deciding the representation by the Detaining Authority and the Central Government would also affect the right of the detenu under Article 22(5)<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>?<\/p>\n

The Court noted that the detenu had made representations on 27-09-2023, addressed to the detaining Authority, Central Government and the Advisory Board. The jail authorities had merely forwarded the representations through ordinary post. These representations neither reached the detaining Authority nor the Central Government and since these representations were sent by ordinary post, they also could not be tracked. It was only after the issuance of the notice by this Court in the present matter, that the ground regarding non-disposal of the representations of the detenu came to the notice of the Authorities concerned. When the representations were received from the Jail Authorities, the same was placed before the Authorities, which were rejected on 11-06-2024 and 12-06-2024 respectively.<\/p>\n

Hence, the Court noted that detenu’s representations dated 27-09-2023 came to be rejected by the detaining Authority and the Central Government on 11-06-2024 and 12-06-2024 respectively i.e. after almost nine months from the date of making the same. Assessing the question of delay, the Court referred to Tara Chand<\/span> v. State of Rajasthan<\/span> (1981) 1 SCC 416<\/span><\/a>, wherein it was held that the delay of one month and five days in communicating the detenu’s representation from the jail to the detaining authority demonstrated gross negligence and extreme callousness. Referring to another authority which dealt with a similar question of delay, the Court noted that it has been held in unequivocal terms, that the intermediary authorities who are communicating authorities are also required to move with an amount of promptitude so that the statutory guarantee of affording earliest opportunity of making the representation and the same reaching the Government is translated into action.<\/p>\n

In the matter at hand, the Court stated that the Superintendent of the Central Prison and Correctional Home had acted in a thoroughly callous and casual manner. Despite there being catena of judgments by this Court that the transmitting authorities must transmit the representation of the detenu promptly<\/span> and it is the corresponding duty of the authorities concerned to consider the said representation and to decide it swiftly<\/span>, the same has been breached in the present matter. The Court also disapproved of the practice of the Jail Authorities in dealing with the valuable right of the detenu in such a casual manner.<\/p>\n

The law laid down in Vijay Kumar<\/span> v. State of J&K<\/span>, (1982) 2 SCC 43<\/a> that the State Government must gear up its machinery to ensure that the representation is transmitted quickly; it reaches the Central Government as quickly as possible and is decided expeditiously, was given a go-bye, in the matter at hand. The Court added that the Jail Authorities ought to have ensured that the representation of the detenu reaches the Authorities at the earliest and in this era of technological advancement, the Jail Authorities could have very well sent copies of the representation to the Detaining\/Appropriate Authority either by email or at least a physical copy could have been sent by Speed Post, so that there could have been some evidence of the said being sent to the competent authority and could have been tracked. Further, the competent Authority should decide such representation with utmost expedition so that the valuable right under Article 22(5)<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> is not denied. Thence, on account of casual, callous and negligent approach of the Jail Authorities, the Court concluded that there was a delay of about nine months in deciding the representation, even otherwise, if the stand of the respondents as made in the counter affidavit would have been accepted, there has been a delay of 27\/20 days on the part of the Central Government and the detaining Authority in deciding the representation. Thus, the Court held that the detention order was liable to be quashed and set aside on this ground also.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

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

Citation:<\/span>
2024 SCC OnLine SC 2496<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Appellants :<\/span>
Jaseela Shaji<\/p>\n

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

\n

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

For Petitioner(s):<\/span>
Shinoj K. Narayanan, Adv; Vishnu Pazhanganat, Adv.; Abid Ali Beeran, Adv.; K. Rajeev, AOR; Niveditha R Menon, Adv.; Pranav Krishna, Adv.; Aditya Verma, Adv.; Tarun Kumar, Adv.<\/p>\n

For Respondent(s):<\/span>
Nachiketa Joshi, Sr. Adv.; Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR; Siddharth Sinha, Adv.; Santosh Kumar, Adv.; Aditya Shankar Dixit, Adv.; Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

CORAM :<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n

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

\n

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

\n

\"KV
KV Viswanathan, J.<\/span><\/img><\/p>\n<\/div>\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 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’s delay matters in such a case.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67517,"featured_media":330735,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[47697,12921,30503,73082,64420,58096,73080,27064,73081,5363],"class_list":["post-330730","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-article-22","tag-cofeposa","tag-detenu","tag-jaseela-shaji","tag-justice-b-r-gavai","tag-justice-kv-viswanathan","tag-justice-prashant-kumar-misra","tag-personal-liberty","tag-prevention-detention","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\nFailure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5): SC<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"SC quashed detention order under COFEPOSA holding that failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\" \/>\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\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\u2019: SC quashes detention order under COFEPOSA\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"SC quashed detention order under COFEPOSA holding that failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/\" \/>\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=\"2024-09-13T07:00:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-09-18T06:07:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.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=\"\u2018Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\u2019: SC quashes detention order under COFEPOSA\" \/>\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=\"8 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\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/\",\"name\":\"Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5): SC\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-09-13T07:00:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-09-18T06:07:38+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624\"},\"description\":\"SC quashed detention order under COFEPOSA holding that failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"detention order under COFEPOSA\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\u2019: SC quashes detention order under COFEPOSA\"}]},{\"@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":"Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5): SC","description":"SC quashed detention order under COFEPOSA holding that failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)","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\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\u2019: SC quashes detention order under COFEPOSA","og_description":"SC quashed detention order under COFEPOSA holding that failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-09-13T07:00:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-09-18T06:07:38+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\u2019: SC quashes detention order under COFEPOSA","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/","name":"Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5): SC","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp","datePublished":"2024-09-13T07:00:21+00:00","dateModified":"2024-09-18T06:07:38+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624"},"description":"SC quashed detention order under COFEPOSA holding that failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"detention order under COFEPOSA"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/13\/failure-furnishing-documents-delay-deciding-detenu-representation-violates-art-225\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Failure in furnishing documents & delay in deciding detenu\u2019s representation violates Art. 22(5)\u2019: SC quashes detention order under COFEPOSA"}]},{"@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\/09\/detention-order-under-COFEPOSA.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"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":330730,"position":0},"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":[]},{"id":329397,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/27\/coordinate-bench-view-of-same-hc-cannot-be-ignored-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":330730,"position":1},"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","author":"Editor","date":"August 27, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"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.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Coordinate Bench of High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Coordinate-Bench-of-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":217088,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/19\/liberty-of-a-detenu-under-cofeposa-has-to-be-subordinate-to-the-good-of-the-people-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":330730,"position":2},"title":"Liberty of a detenu under COFEPOSA has to be subordinate to the good of the people: SC","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"July 19, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Stating that the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority under COFEPOSA is not immune from judicial reviewability, the bench of R. Banumathi and AS Bopanna, JJ has held that, \u201cthe court must be conscious that the satisfaction of the detaining authority is \u201csubjective\u201d in nature and the court\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":256190,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/29\/whether-the-authority-under-cofeposa-can-rely-on-section-123-of-customs-act-1962\/","url_meta":{"origin":330730,"position":3},"title":"Whether the Authority under COFEPOSA can Rely on Section 123 of Customs Act, 1962?","author":"Editor","date":"October 29, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Vijay Shekhar Jha\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/cofeposa-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/cofeposa-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/cofeposa-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/cofeposa-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/cofeposa-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"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":330730,"position":4},"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":330730,"position":5},"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":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/330730","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=330730"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/330730\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/330735"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=330730"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=330730"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=330730"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}