Confidential departmental records used for search and seizure satisfaction were protected from disclosure during a pending enquiry.

Satisfaction to conduct search and seizure was upheld where the authority had sufficient material before it to act. The departmental records and internal notings relied upon for that satisfaction were treated as confidential, and their disclosure was refused because it could prejudice the pending enquiry against the petitioners. The request to inspect those materials was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the departmental records and notings relied upon for satisfaction to conduct search and seizure could be disclosed to the petitioners.

Analysis: The Court found that enough material existed before the authority for arriving at satisfaction to conduct search and seizure. It further held that the records and notings maintained by the Department were confidential and could not be disclosed, as their disclosure would hamper the enquiry pending against the petitioners.

Conclusion: Disclosure of the departmental records was declined, and the prayer to inspect those materials was rejected.

---