Non-placement of retraction material vitiates preventive detention based on confessional statements and subjective satisfaction.

Detention under COFEPOSA was held vitiated because the detaining authority was not supplied with the detenu's retraction letter and the bail application referring to that retraction. The confessional statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act formed the substantial basis of the detention and confirmation orders, so the retraction material was vital to assess voluntariness and reliability. As the detention grounds were treated as a composite whole centred on those statements, the omission could not be cured by severability or by indirect references elsewhere in the record. The challenge therefore succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 was vitiated because the retraction letter and bail application containing the retraction of the relied upon confessional statements were not placed before the detaining authority.

Analysis: The detention order and the confirmation order were founded substantially on the confessional statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. The retraction letter of the detenu and the bail application referring to that retraction were material facts bearing directly on the voluntariness and reliability of those statements. Since those documents were not placed before the detaining authority, the authority did not have before it all vital material capable of affecting its subjective satisfaction. The grounds of detention were treated as a composite ground resting mainly on the impugned statements, so the omission could not be cured by invoking severability or by relying on indirect references in other papers.

Conclusion: The detention order was vitiated for non-placement of the retraction and related material before the detaining authority, and the challenge succeeded.

---