Effective representation in preventive detention requires translated relied-upon documents when the detenu cannot understand English.

Preventive detention requires all relied upon documents to be furnished in a language understood by the detenu so that the constitutional right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) is preserved. Where the detenu is not conversant with English and specifically seeks translations, failure to supply translated copies of documents containing substantive entries that form the basis of detention amounts to inadequate communication. The detention order was therefore vitiated, and the challenge succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention order was vitiated by non-furnishing of translated copies of the relied upon documents in the language known to the detenu, thereby depriving him of an effective representation.

Analysis: The detenu was found not to be conversant with English, and the detention grounds as well as his representation showed that he sought Hindi translations of the documents relied upon. The documents were not mere standard forms but contained written entries that formed the basis of the detention decision. Under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, all relied upon materials must be communicated in a manner that enables a meaningful and effective representation. A document that influences the detention decision cannot be treated as sufficiently communicated if its contents are not furnished in the language understood by the detenu.

Conclusion: The non-furnishing of translated copies of the relied upon documents vitiated the detention order and the challenge succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Reliance upon documents in preventive detention requires supply of those documents, including translations where necessary, in the language known to the detenu so that the constitutional right to make an effective representation is preserved.

---