1988 (12) TMI 180 - SC - FEMA

Quashing the said detention order - Held that - In the instant case as we have said hereinbefore that the bank pass books are not vital and material documents in reaching subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority and as such the failure to furnish the bank pass books to the detenu has not infringed any right of the appellant and the order of detention cannot be questioned as illegal or vitiated on that score. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against judgment dismissing Criminal Writ Petition, Non-production of vital documents before detaining authority, Retraction statement not considered, Non-supply of bank pass books and loose papers, Effectiveness of representation, Relevance of documents in forming subjective satisfaction.

Analysis:
1. The appeal challenges the High Court's dismissal of a Criminal Writ Petition seeking to quash a detention order based on various grounds, including the non-production of vital documents before the detaining authority. The appellant argued that the application for bail and its subsequent variation were crucial documents not considered by the authority. Citing precedent, the appellant contended that failure to present essential documents could vitiate the detention order. However, the Court found that the variation of bail conditions was not a relevant document affecting the detaining authority's decision, as it did not directly relate to the detenu's activities. The Court agreed with the High Court's decision in this regard.

2. Referring to another judgment, the appellant highlighted a case where the failure to present an order of modification of bail conditions influenced the detaining authority's decision. However, the Court distinguished this case, emphasizing that in the present matter, the order of variation of bail conditions was not considered a vital document affecting the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority.

3. The appellant argued that the retraction statement made by the detenu before the Magistrate was not placed before the detaining authority, thus challenging the validity of the detention order. However, the respondent clarified that while the specific application was not known, the detaining authority was aware of the retraction statement and its reply, which was considered before issuing the detention order.

4. Regarding the non-supply of certain documents seized during a search, the appellant contended that the failure to provide these materials infringed the detenu's right to make an effective representation. The detaining authority maintained that all relevant documents were considered in reaching the decision, and copies were furnished to the detenu. The Court held that not all documents mentioned in the panchnama needed to be provided unless crucial for forming subjective satisfaction. Citing precedent, the Court established that bank pass books were not vital documents for reaching subjective satisfaction, thus rejecting the appellant's argument on this point.

5. No additional arguments were presented, leading the Court to dismiss the appeal, with no order as to costs.