https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447895 The Supreme Court held that a detention order under COFEPOSA was not vitiated where the grounds of detention and relied-upon material had been effectively communicated in a language understood by the detenue, and the right to make a representation under Article 22(5) was meaningfully afforded. On the facts, the authorities had promptly attempted service, supplied translated documents, prepared a panchnama before independent witnesses, and recorded the detenue's refusal to receive the papers, despite his awareness of the documents and his representation rights. The challenge was found to rest on suppression and false premises, so the detention order was upheld and no relief was granted. en-us Thu, 04 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447895 The Supreme Court held that a detention order under COFEPOSA was not vitiated where the grounds of detention and relied-upon material had been effectively communicated in a language understood by the detenue, and the right to make a representation under Article 22(5) was meaningfully afforded. On the facts, the authorities had promptly attempted service, supplied translated documents, prepared a panchnama before independent witnesses, and recorded the detenue's refusal to receive the papers, despite his awareness of the documents and his representation rights. The challenge was found to rest on suppression and false premises, so the detention order was upheld and no relief was granted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 04 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447895