NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Thursday upheld the preventive detention order passed by the Central Economic Intelligence Bureau and affirmed the Karnataka High Court order against Kannada actress Ranya Rao for allegedly smuggling gold into the country.
A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh dismissed the appeals filed by Rao's mother and another accused against the December 19, 2025 order of the Karnataka High Court, which had upheld the preventive detention order.
“Detention order is not in contravention of Article 22(3)(b) of the Constitution. Substantial procedural compliance had been made by the authorities while issuing the detention orders. The detenus had been furnished with the relied-upon documents within the prescribed time and that the contents of electronic evidence, including CCTV footage, had been displayed to them in prison,” the apex court said while dismissing the special leave petitions filed by Rao and others.
The Bench also observed that a detenu has no right to be represented by a legal practitioner before the Advisory Board as a matter of course. Such a right would arise only if the detaining authority itself participates through a legal practitioner, which was not the case here.
“The detention order contained adequate reasons, including prior instances of disposal of foreign-marked gold bars, and that a live and proximate link existed between the alleged activities and the need for preventive detention,” the court said.
It added that there was no illegality or violation of constitutional safeguards under Article 22 and upheld the preventive detention order passed by the Central Economic Intelligence Bureau and affirmed by the Karnataka High Court.
The petitioners had argued before both the High Court and the Supreme Court that the detenus and their relatives challenged the detention orders on multiple grounds.
“The relied-upon documents were not properly supplied, that there was no imminent possibility of future smuggling activities, and that the detention orders lacked proper subjective satisfaction by the detaining authority,” they argued.
The petitioners further submitted that the refusal to permit legal representation before the Advisory Board vitiated the detention proceedings.
“The authorities had failed to establish a proximate link between the alleged past activities and the necessity for preventive detention order,” they contended.
Rao has been in jail for more than a year after her arrest in March 2025 in the case. She was detained by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence at the Kempegowda International Airport in Bengaluru.