9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to detention order under COFEPOSA Act based on non-production of vital document before Detaining Authority. Analysis: The writ petition challenges the detention order passed under the COFEPOSA Act by the Detaining Authority. The detenu was found with 34 gold bars upon arrival from Dubai, leading to her arrest. Subsequent statements and retractions were made by the detenu regarding her involvement in smuggling activities. The petition argues that a crucial handwritten retraction dated 2nd December 2002, not produced before the Detaining Authority, vitiates the detention order. The petitioner asserts that under Article 22(5) of the Constitution, all necessary documents must be presented to the Detaining Authority for a meaningful opportunity to make a representation. The Detaining Authority, in forming the decision to detain the individual, considered the detenu's past conduct and activities, concluding that she had a high potential for future smuggling activities. The Detaining Authority found no merit in the detenu's retractions and allegations, emphasizing the importance of material placed before it. However, it was revealed that a crucial second retraction made by the detenu before the Magistrate was not presented before the Detaining Authority, impacting the decision-making process. Legal precedents were cited by the petitioner, emphasizing the significance of presenting all relevant documents before the Detaining Authority for a fair decision-making process. The judgments highlighted the importance of considering all relevant evidence and the potential impact of omitted materials on the detention order's validity. The Detaining Authority's failure to consider the second retraction dated 2nd December 2002 was deemed as a critical omission that invalidated the detention order. The Detaining Authority's assertion that the second retraction was not vital and would not have affected the decision was countered by legal arguments emphasizing the necessity of presenting all vital materials for a fair and just detention process. The court held that the non-consideration of the second retraction document significantly impacted the validity of the detention order. Consequently, the rule was made absolute, directing the detenu's immediate release unless required otherwise under lawful authority.
|
