Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court allowed an appeal against a preventive detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA). The appellant was detained on 04.02.2022 following the seizure of 80.126 kg of gold valued at Rs.39,31,38,219/- from a consignment imported by M/s Healthy Future Leaders Pvt. Ltd. The appellant, a suspect, was arrested on 20.11.2021 but granted bail on 13.12.2021. Subsequently, on 01.02.2022, a detention order was passed against him under COFEPOSA. The appellant made a representation to the Central Government on 10.03.2022, which was rejected on 09.05.2022 after a delay of 60 days. The High Court dismissed his writ petition challenging the detention order. The Supreme Court held that the unexplained delay in considering the representation violated the appellant's fundamental right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The Court emphasized that the right to have a representation considered expeditiously is a fundamental right, and any unexplained delay renders the detention illegal. The Court allowed the appeal, quashed the detention order, and directed the appellant's release.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Delay in Considering Representation - Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India - Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) - The appellant was detained under COFEPOSA for alleged gold smuggling. He made a representation to the Central Government on 10.03.2022, which was rejected on 09.05.2022 after a delay of 60 days. The High Court dismissed his writ petition challenging the detention order. The Supreme Court held that the unexplained delay in considering the representation violated the constitutional right under Article 22(5) and vitiated the detention order. The appeal was allowed and the detention order was quashed. (Paras 18-25) B) Constitutional Law - Right of Detenue - Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India - The Court reiterated that the right to have a representation considered expeditiously is a fundamental right of a detenue. Any unexplained delay in consideration renders the detention illegal. The Court relied on precedents including Rajammal v. State of Tamil Nadu and K.M. Abdulla v. Union of India. (Paras 20-24)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the unexplained delay of 60 days in considering the appellant's representation by the Central Government vitiates the detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) and violates Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court, quashed the detention order, and directed the release of the appellant forthwith.
Law Points
- Preventive detention
- Delay in considering representation
- Article 22(5) of the Constitution
- COFEPOSA Act
- Right of detenue
- Speedy consideration
