Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, father of the detenu Shanidas Parshuram Mhatre, challenged the detention order dated 8.10.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Thane, under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981. The detention order was based on C.R. No. 77 of 2004 for offences under Sections 384 and 387 IPC and three in-camera statements of witnesses. The detenu was arrested on 4.6.2004 but released on bail on 9.6.2004. The in-camera statements were recorded on 6.9.2004 and 10.9.2004. The detenu, a Maharashtrian who does not know English and studied in Marathi, was served with a Marathi translation of the grounds. He made a representation on 16.11.2004, which was rejected on 24.11.2004. The petition challenged the order on grounds of untruthful translation and failure to furnish correct translation despite request. The court held that the detaining authority is obligated to furnish correct and true translation in a language understood by the detenu. The Marathi translation supplied was not correct, as admitted by the respondents in their affidavit. This failure deprived the detenu of his right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The court quashed the detention order and directed the detenu's release.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Right to Make Effective Representation - Untruthful Translation - Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 - The detaining authority is obligated to furnish correct and true translation of the grounds of detention in a language understood by the detenu. Failure to do so, despite specific request, deprives the detenu of the right to make an effective representation and renders the detention order illegal. (Paras 5-8) B) Preventive Detention - Grounds of Detention - Language - Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 - Where the detenu does not know English and his mother tongue is Marathi, the detaining authority must ensure that the Marathi translation supplied is accurate and truthful. Supplying a translation that is not correct amounts to non-compliance with the requirement of communicating the grounds. (Paras 4-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the failure to furnish correct and truthful translation of the grounds of detention in Marathi, despite specific request, vitiates the detention order and violates the detenu's right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
Final Decision
The detention order dated 8.10.2004 is quashed and set aside. The detenu Shanidas Parshuram Mhatre be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Right to make effective representation
- Untruthful translation violates Article 22(5)
- Obligation to furnish correct translation
- Detenu's right to know grounds in language he understands
