AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (10) TMI 261
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... keeping smuggled goods and dealing in smuggled goods other wise than by engaging in transporting or concealing goods in future. Along with the detention order the grounds of detention were also supplied to the petitioner. 2. The facts germane to the present petition are that on the intervening night of 5th/6th January, 1992, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence searched the godown of the petitioner situated at Rewari Road, Village Surana, Narnaul, District Mahindergarh (Haryana). This was supposed to be in occupation of the petitioner and his father. The search was conducted in the presence of the petitioner and was witnessed by Shri Bishan Dayal. The search resulted in recovery of 158 silver ingots/slabs of foreign origin, collectivel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., New Delhi through the Supdt. District Jail, Mahindergrah, Haryana. He was also made aware that he could be heard by the Advisory Board in due course if the Board considers it essential to do so. The relied upon documents were supplied to the petitioner. 4. The petitioner has assailed his detention primarily on the ground that the detaining authority has relied upon the documents which were irrelevant and some of the documents were illegible. Hindi Translation supplied was not the correct translation of the English documents and the documents in vernacular i.e. Hindu were not supplied to him. 5. During the course of arguments, Mr. Madan Lokur, appearing for the Union of India showed from the file that the documents supplied to the petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich were placed before him. The documents referred to in the ground under reply were relied upon for a proper application of the case." REPLY TO GROUND IV "The contents of Ground IV are denied. In reply to the contention raised by the petitioner, it is submitted that all the documents supplied to the detenu/petitioner were quite clear and legible. The detenu had put his signature on each and every page of the documents supplied to him after his satisfaction that the same were legible. The violation of petitioner's right guaranteed under Art. 22(5) of the Constitution of India is denied. It is further submitted that all the documents whether relied upon by the detaining authority were supplied to the detenu. The detenu'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner. This act itself will show that the detaining authority mechanically signed the detention order without application of mind. Even when this ground was specifically raised in the petition, the respondent reiterated that these were relevant documents and have been taken note of. These documents on the face of it would show that these have no bearing or concern whatsoever with the prejudicial activities of the petitioner. Therefore, the consideration for arriving at this decision to detain the petitioner was based on irrelevant and extraneous material. 9. Counsel for Union of India, on the other hand, urged that in fact these documents were looked into by the detaining authority for the purpose of proper appreciation and to arrived at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....came to the conclusion that the petitioner should be detained and passed the impugned order. The subjective satisfaction can be challenged only when the detaining authority bases its decision on irrelevant documents. Then and then alone such a detention order has to be aside not otherwise. These documents referred to above according to Mr. Lokur are inconsequential. Even if these were remained on the record at the time of passing the order, it will not affect the decision making process of the authority. By the mere presence of these documents on the file, the detenu has not been prejudiced. Neither the act of the detaining authority nor the said decision making process is in fact based on these documents nor the right of the detenu has bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vailable with this Court to find out whether a subjective satisfaction arrived at was based on the proper application of mind or not. As and when the detaining authority relied on irrelevant material, Courts have been lifting the veil to see that the said subjective satisfaction was proper or not. To arrive at the conclusion that subjective satisfaction was proper or not, the Court has prima facie to see the material placed before the detaining authority. Once the Court comes to the conclusion that detaining authority also scrutinised and considered irrelevant documents and did not bother to see that the documents were relevant or irrelevant but just sign the order, then in such a case an irresistable conclusion would be that the detaining ....