2012 (1) TMI 365 - HC - Customs

Detention order set aside for lack of documents and delay. Habeas corpus granted, detenu to be released.

The court set aside the detention order due to the non-placement of relevant documents before the State Advisory Board/Confirming Authority and the ... - Issues Involved:1. Non-placing of relevant documents before the State Advisory Board/Confirming Authority.2. Delay in execution of the detention order.Summary:Issue 1: Non-placing of relevant documents before the State Advisory Board/Confirming AuthorityThe habeas corpus petition challenged the detention order on the ground that the show cause notice dated 24.11.2010 and the reply to the show cause notice dated 30.11.2010 were not placed before the State Advisory Board/Confirming Authority. The petitioner argued that this omission vitiated the detention order. The court referred to previous judgments, including the decision reported in 2000 (3) CTC 97 (Rajeswari v. Joint Secretary to Government), which held that relevant documents, even if they originated after the passing of the detention order, must be placed before the Advisory Board if they are material to the subject of detention. The court concluded that not placing these documents constituted a material irregularity/illegality, thereby vitiating the order of confirmation.Issue 2: Delay in execution of the detention orderThe petitioner also contended that there was an inordinate delay of 9 months and 18 days in executing the detention order dated 4.11.2010, which was executed only on 22.8.2011. The court noted that the detenu was complying with bail conditions and appearing before the court on all hearing dates. The court found that the detenu was not absconding, as claimed by the respondent, and that the delay in execution was not satisfactorily explained. The court cited several precedents, including the Supreme Court decision in 2000 SCC (Crl) 411 (A. Mohammed Farook v. Joint Secretary to Government of India), which held that unexplained delays in executing detention orders vitiate the detention.Conclusion:The court set aside the detention order on both grounds: the non-placement of relevant documents before the State Advisory Board/Confirming Authority and the unreasonable and unexplained delay in executing the detention order. The habeas corpus petition was allowed, and the detenu was ordered to be released forthwith, provided his detention was not required in any other case.