TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court quashes detention order, orders immediate release due to delay violating detainee's rights.</h1> <h3>Smt. Rekha Kamlesh Shah Versus Union Of India</h3> The court allowed the petition, quashed the detention order under the COFEPOSA Act, and directed the immediate release of the detenu due to the ... - Issues:Detention order under COFEPOSA Act, Delay in communication of rejection of representation, Violation of detenu's rights under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India.Analysis:1. The judgment pertains to a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the detention order of a detenu under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA Act). The detention order was passed by a Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue. The court found that the continued detention of the detenu was legally flawed due to the lack of communication regarding the rejection of his representation dated 2-3-1998.2. It was established that the detenu had submitted a representation before the Central Advisory Board, which was subsequently rejected by the Central Government. However, there was a significant delay in communicating this rejection to the detenu. The court emphasized the importance of promptly disposing of representations and communicating the outcomes to the detenu, citing relevant legal precedents such as Smt. Shalini Sohini v. Union of India, Harish Pahwa v. State of U.P., and Rama Dhondu Borade v. V.K. Saraf, Commissioner of Police.3. The court highlighted the duty of the State to expeditiously consider and communicate decisions on representations made by detainees. In this case, the delay between the rejection of the detenu's representation and its communication to him rendered his continued detention legally untenable. The court referred to previous judgments to support its decision to quash the detention order under COFEPOSA Act.4. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned detention order, and directed the immediate release of the detenu unless required in another case. The ruling was made absolute, emphasizing the importance of upholding the detenu's rights under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and ensuring due process in matters of detention under special laws like the COFEPOSA Act.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
