Advisory Board opinion on preventive detention is confidential and not open to merits challenge under Article 136

The Advisory Board under the preventive detention statute performs a limited, confidential advisory role: it considers the material and records only whether sufficient cause exists for detention. That opinion is intended to assist the appropriate Government and is not a judicial or quasi-judicial determination open to merits-based scrutiny under Article 136. The Supreme Court held that a challenge to such an opinion was not maintainable and dismissed the special leave petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the opinion of the Advisory Board under Section 8 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, recording that there was no sufficient cause for detention, is amenable to challenge under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under Article 22 of the Constitution of India and Section 8 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 makes the Advisory Board's report confidential except for the opinion recorded therein. The Board's function in preventive detention matters is limited to considering the materials and expressing whether sufficient cause exists for detention. Earlier decisions had already held that the Board's opinion is advisory in character, is intended to assist the appropriate Government, and is not meant to be subjected to judicial review or scrutiny on merits. The decisions relied upon to support maintainability arose in different statutory settings involving bodies exercising judicial or quasi-judicial power, which is not the nature of the Advisory Board's role here.

Conclusion: The challenge to the Advisory Board's opinion was held not maintainable, and the special leave petition was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: An Advisory Board under the preventive detention statute performs a limited, confidential advisory function, and its opinion on sufficiency of cause for detention is not amenable to challenge on merits under Article 136.

---