2008 (4) TMI 780 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Non-supply of relied upon documents.
2. Relevance of referred documents.
3. Right to make an effective representation.

Summary:

Issue 1: Non-supply of relied upon documents
The petitioners, the wife and mother of the detenus, challenged the detention orders made u/s 3(1)(i) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The learned senior counsel argued that the detention order is vitiated due to the non-supply of crucial documents such as the diary, Form 13, and an authorization letter, which were relied upon by the detaining authority. The court noted that the failure to supply these documents, despite a specific request, deprived the detenus of their right to make an effective representation, thus vitiating the detention order.

Issue 2: Relevance of referred documents
The Additional Public Prosecutor contended that the documents were merely referred to and not relied upon. However, the court observed that the diary, Form 13, and the authorization letter had relevance for passing the detention order. The court referred to the Full Bench judgment in G.Kalaiselvi v. State of Tamil Nadu, which stated that refusal to supply relevant documents without valid reason could vitiate the detention order. The court concluded that these documents should be considered as relied upon documents.

Issue 3: Right to make an effective representation
The court emphasized that the right to make an effective representation is an integral part of the fundamental right enshrined under Art.22(5) of the Constitution of India. The non-supply of the requested documents deprived the detenus of this right. The court cited the judgment in Pownammal v. State of Tamil Nadu, which held that non-furnishing of relied upon documents vitiates the detention order. The court found that the detaining authority's vague explanation for not supplying the documents was insufficient.

Judgment:
The court quashed the detention orders dated 16.7.2007 made in G.O.SR.I/530-5/07 and G.O.SR.I/530-6/07 Public (SC) Department, allowing H.C.P.No.1208 of 2007 and H.C.P.No.1209 of 2007. The detenus were directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless required in connection with any other case.