Case Note & Summary
The case involved a writ petition filed by a petitioner detained under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985. The petitioner alleged that his representation against the detention, made on 15th July 1987, was not considered by the detaining authority or the State Government. The detaining authority claimed to have considered and rejected the representation on 21st July 1987. The court examined the failure of the State Government to address the representation and noted the lack of explanation for the delay in its disposal. The court referenced the precedent set in Mohinuddin v. District Magistrate, Beed & Ors., where similar delays rendered detention invalid. The court concluded that the right to representation under Article 22(5) is a constitutional safeguard that must be observed, and the failure to do so in this case made the detention illegal. Consequently, the court quashed the detention order and directed the immediate release of the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Representation - Detention Order - The right of representation under Article 22(5) is a valuable constitutional right that must be strictly observed by the Government. - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 22(5) - The court held that the failure of the State Government to consider the representation made by the petitioner against his detention rendered the detention invalid and constitutionally impermissible. The court emphasized that the right to representation includes the right to proper consideration of the representation. (Paras 829-831).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the failure of the State Government to consider and dispose of the detenu's representation rendered the detention illegal.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court quashed the detention order under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985, due to the failure of the State Government to consider the petitioner's representation, rendering the detention illegal and constitutionally impermissible. The court directed that the petitioner be set at liberty forthwith.
Law Points
- Constitutional rights
- detention
- representation
- procedural safeguards
