1981 (10) TMI 174 - SC - FEMA

Validity of an order dated March 27, 1981 passed by respondent 1, the State of Punjab, under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign enchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 challenged Held that - The failure in this case on the part either of the Jail Superintendent or the State Government to forward the detenu s representation to the Central Government has deprived the detenu of the valuable right to have his detention revoked by that Government. The coutinued detention of the detenu must therefore be held illegal and the detenu set free. Petitions allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Validity of order under Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974; Delay in consideration of representations by State and Central Government; Failure to forward representation to Central Government; Legality of continued detention.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the validity of an order passed by the State of Punjab under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The petitioner, while in detention, submitted representations to both the State and Central Government through the Jail Superintendent. The State Government considered and rejected the representation, but the Central Government claimed not to have received it. The Supreme Court noted the failure to forward the representation to the Central Government, depriving the detenu of the right to defend his liberty. The Court emphasized the importance of procedural safeguards in preventive detention laws and held the continued detention illegal, ordering the detenu's release.

In a similar case, the Court reiterated the obligation of the Central Government to promptly consider representations from detenus for revocation of detention orders. The Court referenced previous judgments where inordinate delays in considering representations were deemed unconstitutional. In the present case, the representation to the Central Government was not forwarded at all, leading to the illegal detention of the petitioner. Consequently, the Court allowed the petitions and directed the detenu's release as per the order dated October 1.

The Court highlighted the significance of forwarding detenus' representations to the Central Government for timely consideration. The failure to do so in this case resulted in a violation of the detenu's rights and rendered the continued detention unlawful. By emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and timely review of detention orders, the Court upheld the detenu's right to liberty and ordered their release.