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 Validated, Delay Deemed Illegal. Immediate Release Ordered.</h1> <h3>Abdul Nasar Adam Ismail Th. Abdul Basheer Adam Ismail Versus State Of Maharashtra & Ors.</h3> Abdul Nasar Adam Ismail Th. Abdul Basheer Adam Ismail Versus State Of Maharashtra & Ors. - 2013 AIR 1376, 2013 (6) SCR 86, 2013 (4) SCC 435, 2013 (6) JT ... Issues Involved:1. Legality of the detention order dated 16/4/2012.2. Delay in considering the detenu's representation by the State Government.3. Independent consideration of the detenu's representation by the detaining authority.Summary:Legality of the Detention Order:The appellant challenged the detention order dated 16/4/2012 issued u/s 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, aimed at preventing future smuggling activities. The detenu was found carrying concealed gold upon arrival from Dubai, leading to the detention order.Delay in Considering the Representation:The appellant argued that the delay in considering his representation violated his right u/s Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The representation dated 23/6/2012 was rejected on 24/7/2012, indicating a delay. The Court emphasized that any unexplained delay in considering the representation would render the continued detention illegal. The State Government's explanation for the delay was found reasonable, except for the unexplained delay by the jail authority in forwarding the representation.Independent Consideration of the Representation:The appellant contended that the detaining authority did not consider the representation independently. This point was not raised in the petition or before the High Court. The Court noted that the detaining authority processed the representation through the concerned officials and rejected it within four days. The procedure followed was deemed appropriate, and the submission regarding lack of independent consideration was rejected.Conclusion:The Court held that the detention order dated 16/4/2012 is valid. However, due to the unexplained delay by the jail authority in forwarding the representation, the continued detention of the detenu is rendered illegal. The Court directed the immediate release of the detenu if not already released and not required in any other case. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 