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>Detention order quashed for lack of retraction letters, confessional statements without consideration deemed invalid.</h1> <h3>Payal Garg Versus UOI & Anr.</h3> The court allowed the writ petition, quashing the detention order and confirmation order due to the non-placement of retraction letters before the ... - Issues Involved:1. Non-placement of retraction letters before the detaining authority.2. Reliance on confessional statements in the detention order.3. Legal consequences of non-placement of vital documents.Summary:Issue 1: Non-placement of Retraction Letters Before the Detaining AuthorityPayal Garg, wife of the detenu Lokesh Garg, filed a writ petition u/s Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of Habeas Corpus to quash the detention order dated 27th August 2010 u/s 3(1) of COFEPOSA. The petitioner challenged the non-placement of the retraction letter and bail application of co-detenu Manish Jalhotra before the detaining authority. The detaining authority relied on the confessional statements of Manish Jalhotra and Lokesh Garg, but the retraction letters were not presented. The respondents claimed they did not have copies of these letters as they were filed in the court of ACMM.Issue 2: Reliance on Confessional Statements in the Detention OrderThe grounds of detention heavily relied on the confessional statements of Lokesh Garg dated 9th March 2010 and Manish Jalhotra dated 14th June 2010. The court noted that these statements formed the cornerstone of the detention order. The retractions were not considered, which could have influenced the detaining authority's decision. The court emphasized that the retractions were of vital importance and should have been placed before the detaining authority.Issue 3: Legal Consequences of Non-placement of Vital DocumentsThe court referred to several precedents, including Asha Devi Vs. K Shiv Raj and Deepak Bajaj Vs. State of Maharashtra, highlighting that the failure to place retractions before the detaining authority vitiates the detention order. The court held that indirect references to retractions in bail applications are not substitutes for direct retractions. The non-placement of retractions before the detaining authority led to non-application of mind, rendering the detention order invalid and illegal.Conclusion:In view of the legal position and the non-placement of retraction letters, the court allowed the writ petition, quashing the detention order dated 27th August 2010 and the confirmation order dated 18th February 2013. Lokesh Garg was ordered to be released forthwith unless required to be detained in accordance with law in any other case/order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
