1992 (3) TMI 353 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
Detention under the National Security Act, 1980; Right to make representation to State and Central Government; Obligation of State Government to forward representation to Central Government.

Analysis:

The judgment involves a case where a detenu was detained under the National Security Act, 1980, by the District Magistrate of Bulandshahar, Uttar Pradesh. The detenu submitted a representation against his detention through the jail authorities, but the representation was addressed ambiguously to "The Home Secretary" without specifying whether it was intended for the State Government or the Central Government. The State Government rejected the representation, leading to a petition challenging the detention under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

The District Magistrate, in response, admitted receiving copies of the representation through the jail authorities, with one copy retained in the office, six copies forwarded to the Government of U.P., and one copy communicated to the Advisory Board under the National Security Act. The detenu's counsel argued that even though no representation was sent to the Central Government directly by the detenu, the State Government should have forwarded a copy to the Central Government as per the interpretation of relevant sections of the Act.

The Supreme Court, in its analysis, noted that the detenu was informed of his right to make representations to both the State and Central Government. Despite the detenu providing multiple copies of the representation to the Superintendent Jail, the representation was only sent to the State Government and not to the Central Government. The Court held that the Superintendent Jail had a legal obligation to forward one copy of the representation to the Central Government since the detenu had given sufficient copies for onward submission as per the grounds of detention. Due to the failure to forward the representation to the Central Government, the detenu was denied the opportunity to make an effective representation, leading to the quashing of the detention order.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the detention order dated July 23, 1991, emphasizing the importance of fulfilling the detenu's right to make representations to both the State and Central Government in cases of detention under the National Security Act, 1980.