NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court recently observed that refusal to supply documents requested by the detenu or supply of illegible or blurred copies of the documents relied upon by the detaining authority while issuing detention order amounts to violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution. Article 22(5) confers two rights on the detenu, firstly, the right to be informed of the grounds on which the order of detention has been made and, secondly, to be afforded an earliest opportunity to make a representation against the order of detention.
A bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar said that right of personal liberty and individual freedom is the most cherished and cannot be taken away in any matter even temporarily, “It is well settled that the right to make a representation implies that the detenu should have all the information that will enable him to make an effective representation.
No doubt, this right is again subject to the right or privilege given by clause (6). At the same time, refusal to supply the documents requested by the detenu or supply of illegible or blurred copies of the documents relied upon by the detaining authority amounts to violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution. Although it is true that whether an opportunity has been afforded to make an effective representation always depends on the facts and circumstances of each case,” a bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar said.
Court’s order came in an appeal preferred against Manipur HC’s October 28, 2018 decision to set aside the detention order passed under Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988. The detention order was quashed by the HC on the ground that the detenu was not supplied with legible copies of documents relied upon by the detaining authority while passing detention order.
The bench said, “we find no substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants that merely because respondent no.1 has failed to raise this question before the detaining authority which go into root of the matter to take away the right vested in the appellant/detenu in assailing the order of detention while availing the remedy available to him under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.”
Preservation of forests should be part of state policies, observes SC
NEW DELHI: While upholding UP government’s decision to establish wood-based industries, the SC recently observed that preservation and sustainable management of forests deserves to be given due importance in formulation of policies by the State. A bench of Justices BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna said that the need for sustainable development must also be taken into account while ensuring protection of the environment. “Undisputedly, it is the duty of the State as well as its citizens to safeguard the forest of the country. The resources of the present are to be preserved for the future generations. However, one principle cannot be applied in isolation of the other,: the court said.