Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Mohammed Tanveer Pariyani, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus to quash the detention order dated 16.09.2014 passed by the District Magistrate, Pune, under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 (MPDA). The petitioner was detained as a 'dangerous person' under the Act. The grounds of detention alleged that the detenu was involved in criminal activities affecting public order. The petitioner challenged the detention on multiple grounds, primarily that the detaining authority failed to supply copies of documents and material relied upon in the grounds of detention, thereby impairing his right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution. Additionally, it was contended that the representation made by the detenu was not considered promptly by the State Government. The respondents, represented by the APP, opposed the petition. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found that the detenu was not supplied with the documents referred to in the grounds of detention, which were essential for him to make an effective representation. The Court also noted that there was an unexplained delay in the consideration of the representation. Relying on settled law, the Court held that non-supply of relevant documents and delay in considering representation vitiate the detention order. Consequently, the Court allowed the petition, quashed the detention order, and directed the detenu to be set at liberty. The rule was made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Habeas Corpus - Procedural Safeguards - Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 (MPDA) - Sections 3, 8, 9, 10 - The petitioner challenged the detention order dated 16.09.2014 on grounds of non-supply of vital documents and delay in consideration of representation. The Court held that failure to supply documents relied upon by the detaining authority vitiates the detention order, and the right to make an effective representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution was infringed. (Paras 1-2) B) Preventive Detention - Right to Representation - Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India - The detenu's representation was not considered with reasonable expedition. The Court held that unexplained delay in considering the representation renders the detention illegal. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of detention under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 (MPDA) was valid when the detenu was not supplied with relevant documents and his representation was not considered promptly.
Final Decision
The Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The detention order bearing No.PSA1214/CR47(3)/SPL3(A) dated 16.09.2014 is quashed and set aside. The detenu Mohd. Tanveer Pariyani is directed to be set at liberty.
Law Points
- Preventive detention
- Habeas Corpus
- Procedural safeguards
- Right to make representation
- Supply of documents
