Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Jayamma, wife of the detenu Giddappa @ Lambu Giddappa, filed a habeas corpus petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the preventive detention order dated 15.07.2016 passed by the Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Shivamogga (Respondent No.3) under the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum-Grabbers Act, 1985 (Karnataka Act 12 of 1985). The detention order was approved by the Under Secretary, Home Department on 20.07.2016 and confirmed on 17.08.2016. The petitioner contended that the detenu was not supplied with the grounds of detention in a language known to him, as he only knew Telugu, while the grounds were served in English and Kannada. This, it was argued, violated Article 22(5) of the Constitution and Section 8 of the Act, which require that the grounds be communicated to the detenu as soon as possible and in a language he understands, to enable him to make an effective representation. The respondents, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, argued that the detenu was literate in Kannada and that the grounds were properly communicated. However, the court examined the record and found that the detenu had stated in his representation that he did not know Kannada or English and only knew Telugu. The court noted that the respondents had not placed any material to rebut this claim. The court held that the failure to communicate the grounds in a language known to the detenu was a serious procedural lapse that defeated the purpose of the constitutional safeguard under Article 22(5). The court quashed the detention order and directed the respondents to release the detenu forthwith.
Headnote
A) Preventive Detention - Communication of Grounds - Language - Article 22(5) of Constitution of India, Section 8 of Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1985 - The detenu was served grounds of detention only in English and Kannada, but he knew only Telugu - The court held that failure to communicate grounds in a language known to the detenu vitiates the detention order as it prevents him from making an effective representation - The order was quashed and detenu directed to be set at liberty (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the detention order under the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1985 is vitiated for non-communication of grounds of detention in a language known to the detenu, thereby violating Article 22(5) of the Constitution and Section 8 of the Act.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, quashed the detention order dated 15.07.2016, the approval order dated 20.07.2016, and the confirmation order dated 17.08.2016, and directed the respondents to release the detenu Giddappa @ Lambu Giddappa forthwith.
Law Points
- Preventive detention
- Right to communicate grounds in known language
- Article 22(5) of Constitution
- Section 8 of Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act
- 1985
- Habeas corpus
- Mandamus
