9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved: Challenge of a detention order passed under the COFEPOSA Act based on confessions made by the petitioner and another individual, and the impact of retractions on the detention order.
Summary: The petitioner challenged a detention order passed against him under the COFEPOSA Act based on confessions made by himself and another individual. The detaining authority relied on the confessions to reach a subjective satisfaction for preventive detention. The petitioner alleged that his confession was extracted under duress. The detaining authority did not consider retractions made by the other individual, Sowkath Ali, prior to passing the detention order. The petitioner's counsel argued that the detaining authority was not informed of Sowkath Ali's retractions, which could have impacted the decision. The respondent's counsel contended that the petitioner's confession alone was sufficient for detention, and even if Sowkath Ali's confession was considered, it could be separated from the main ground. Section 5A of the COFEPOSA Act was cited in support of this argument. Upon review, the Court found that the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction was based on a cumulative effect of all grounds, including both confessions. The Court noted that the detaining authority may have considered Sowkath Ali's retraction if informed. The Court rejected the argument that the petitioner's confession alone justified detention, emphasizing the importance of all materials considered. The Court referenced a previous case where Sowkath Ali's detention order was quashed. Consequently, the Court quashed the detention order against the petitioner and ordered his release if solely based on the challenged order. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
|
