The Supreme Court of India quashed the detention order of the appellant's husband under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA). The Court found that non-supply of key documents and delayed consideration of the detenu's representation violated constitutional safeguards, specifically Article 22(5). The detention order relied on statements and evidence that were not fully disclosed to the detenu, hindering his ability to make an effective representation.

The Supreme Court set aside both the High Court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition and the original detention order, reinforcing the necessity of procedural fairness in preventive detention cases.

1. Background:

   • The appellant, Jaseela Shaji, challenged the detention of her husband, Appisseril Kochu Mohammed Shaji, under COFEPOSA.
   • He was detained based on an order dated 31st August 2023 by the Joint Secretary, COFEPOSA, citing illegal foreign exchange dealings.

2. Grounds of Detention:

   • The detenu was alleged to be involved in illegal hawala transactions, sale, and purchase of foreign currency without proper licenses.
   • Key evidence included statements from several individuals and WhatsApp chats.

3. Violation of Article 22(5):

   • The Court highlighted that the detenu's right to an effective representation was compromised due to the non-supply of key statements, particularly those of a witness, Preetha Pradeep, which were pivotal in forming the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority.
   • The delayed transmission and decision on the detenu’s representation also constituted a violation of his rights under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.

4. Supreme Court Judgment:

   • The Court quashed the detention order, ruling that the failure to provide the full materials relied upon in the detention decision and the delay in processing the representation invalidated the detention under COFEPOSA.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

1. COFEPOSA Act, 1974 - Section 3(1): Preventive detention provisions for persons engaged in activities prejudicial to the augmentation of foreign exchange.
2. Article 22(5) of the Indian Constitution: Protects the right of detenu to make an effective representation against detention.

Ratio Decidendi:

The non-supply of critical documents, combined with an inordinate delay in processing the detenu’s representation, violates the constitutional rights guaranteed under Article 22(5). The detention under COFEPOSA was thus deemed unlawful.

Subject:

Preventive Detention, COFEPOSA, Habeas Corpus

Preventive Detention, Constitutional Rights, Article 22, Foreign Exchange