Preventive detention order invalid where inconsistent language versions showed non-application of mind and blocked an effective representation.

A preventive detention order under the COFEPOSA Act was held invalid where the Hindi and English versions of the detention order and grounds were materially inconsistent and did not convey the same basis of detention. The court held that such variance showed non-application of mind by the detaining authority because subjective satisfaction must rest on a precise and consistent foundation. It also held that the inconsistency prejudiced the detenu's constitutional right under Article 22(5) to make an effective representation. The detention was therefore treated as illegal, and the detenu was directed to be released forthwith.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention order was vitiated by inconsistency between the Hindi and English versions of the order and the grounds of detention, resulting in non-application of mind and denial of an effective opportunity of representation.

Analysis: The detention order under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 was issued in two versions which did not convey the same object of detention. One version referred to preventing the detenu from engaging in transporting smuggled goods, while the other excluded that ground and referred to different activities. The grounds of detention likewise differed in the two language versions. In preventive detention matters, the detaining authority must apply its mind to the precise basis on which subjective satisfaction is reached, and any mutually inconsistent formulation in the operative order or grounds undermines that requirement. Such variance also prejudices the detenu's right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion: The detention order was invalid for non-application of mind and the continued detention was illegal.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded and the detenu was directed to be released forthwith.

Ratio Decidendi: A preventive detention order is liable to be quashed where materially inconsistent language versions of the detention order or grounds disclose non-application of mind and impair the detenu's right to make an effective representation.

---