Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, wife of the detenu Mohammed Taki Ahmed Ali Chunara @ Mohammed Islam Mohammed Ali Shaikh, challenged the detention order passed by the Commissioner of Police, Brihanmumbai on 15-12-2004 under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords Bootleggers Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981. The detention order was based on one criminal case (CR No.185/4 for offences under Sections 353, 186, 506 IPC read with Section 37(1)(a), 142 of Bombay Police Act) and two in-camera statements. The order was served on the detenu on 18-12-2004, and the State Government approved it on 20-12-2004. The detenu made a representation on 29-12-2004 to Respondents 1 and 2 seeking revocation of the detention order. The petitioner alleged inordinate delay in deciding the representation, as it was not decided until 21-3-2005, a delay of about 82 days. The petitioner also sent a representation dated 26-3-2005 pointing out the delay and requesting release. The court considered the issue of whether the delay in deciding the representation vitiated the detention order. The court noted that the representation was made on 29-12-2004 but was decided only on 21-3-2005, and there was no explanation for the delay. The court held that such inordinate and unexplained delay in deciding the representation infringes the detenu's fundamental right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution to have the representation considered as expeditiously as possible. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, quashed the detention order, and directed the detenu's release unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Right to Make Representation - Article 22(5) of Constitution - Delay in Decision - The detenu made a representation on 29-12-2004 which was decided on 21-3-2005, a delay of about 82 days. The court held that such inordinate and unexplained delay in deciding the representation vitiates the detention order as it infringes the fundamental right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution. (Paras 3-5) B) Preventive Detention - Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords Bootleggers Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981 - Section 3 - Grounds of Detention - The detention order was based on one criminal case and two in-camera statements. However, the court did not examine the merits of the grounds as the petition was allowed on the ground of delay in deciding the representation. (Paras 2, 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the inordinate delay in deciding the detenu's representation vitiates the detention order under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords Bootleggers Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The order of detention dated 15-12-2004 passed by Respondent no.2 is quashed and set aside. The detenu be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Preventive detention
- Right to make representation
- Inordinate delay
- Article 22(5) of Constitution
- Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords Bootleggers Drug Offenders and Dangerous Persons Act 1981
- Section 3
