SC quashes detention order after denying WhatsApp chat copies violated Article 22(5) constitutional rights in smuggling case

The SC allowed the appeal and quashed the detention order in a smuggling case involving contraband gold. The detenue had requested copies of WhatsApp chats but was denied by the HC Division Bench, which held that non-supply would not vitiate the detention order. The SC ruled that the Division Bench should have followed an earlier coordinate bench decision in similar cases with identical grounds, or referred the matter to a larger bench if disagreeing with the precedent. The detention order was set aside for violating the detenue's constitutional rights under Article 22(5).

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Non-supply of relevant documents (WhatsApp chats) affecting the right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
2. Judicial discipline and adherence to the precedent set by a Coordinate Bench.

Detailed Analysis:

Non-supply of Relevant Documents:
The appellant challenged the detention order dated 24th August 2021 and its confirmation on 24th May 2022 on the grounds of non-supply of relevant documents, specifically WhatsApp chats, which were crucial for making an effective representation. The Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appellant's writ petition, distinguishing it from a previous judgment by a Coordinate Bench in the case of Nushath Koyamu vs. Union of India, where the detention orders were quashed due to the non-supply of WhatsApp chats.

The Supreme Court noted that the grounds of detention for the present detenue and the co-detenus in the Nushath Koyamu case were almost identical. The Coordinate Bench in Nushath Koyamu had held that the non-supply of WhatsApp chats, which were relied upon by the detaining authority, vitally affected the detenus' right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution to make an effective representation. The Supreme Court emphasized that the non-supply of these documents impaired the detenue's procedural rights, rendering the detention order invalid.

Judicial Discipline and Adherence to Precedent:
The Supreme Court highlighted the importance of judicial discipline and the need for consistency in judicial decisions. It criticized the Division Bench of the High Court for not following the precedent set by the Coordinate Bench in the Nushath Koyamu case. The Court referred to its own observations in Official Liquidator vs. Dayanand and Others, stressing that disrespect for judicial discipline undermines the credibility of the judicial institution and encourages conflicting judgments.

The Supreme Court stated that if the Division Bench of the High Court believed the earlier decision of the Coordinate Bench was incorrect, it should have referred the matter to a larger Bench instead of rendering a conflicting judgment. The Court reiterated that predictability and certainty are hallmarks of judicial jurisprudence, and deviation from established precedents without proper justification harms the judicial system.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashing both the detention order dated 24th August 2021 and its confirmation on 24th May 2022. The Court's decision was based on the failure to supply the WhatsApp chats, which were crucial for the detenue to make an effective representation, and the lack of adherence to judicial discipline by the High Court's Division Bench.

---