TMI Blog1980 (6) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act confers a constitutional right on the detenu to have his representation considered by the Central Government. It is true that the Central Government has a discretion to revoke or confirm the detention but the detenu has undoubtedly a right that his representation should be considered by the Central Government for whatever worth it is. The mere fact that the detenu had sent a copy to the Central Government does not absolve the detaining authority from the statutory duty of forwarding the representation of the detenu to the Central Government - appeal allowed - the continued detention of the detenu in this case is legally invalid - W.P.(C) 631 OF 1980 - - - Dated:- 23-6-1980 - SYED MURTAZA FAZALALI, J. JUDGMENT The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s given nor they were explained to detenu in a language known to him. This allegation seems to have been denied by the respondents in para 14 of the affidavit of Mr. P. M. Shah, on behalf of the detaining authority, where he stated that the grounds were explained to the detenu in the language known to him. It was averred in para 5 that one Mr. A. K. Sharma, Police Inspector, C.I.D. (Crime Branch), Ahmedabad had explained to the detenu the order of detention and the grounds communicated to him on January 30, 1980. This affidavit, in my opinion, is wholly inadmissible in evidence. If it was a fact that Mr. Sharma had personally explained the grounds to the detenu then the respondents should have filed an affidavit of Mr. Sharma himself to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unds bear some sort of a certificate to show that the grounds have been explained to the detenu in the language which he understands. A bare denial at the stage when Habeas Corpus petition is filed in the court by the detaining authority that these formalities were observed would be of no consequence particularly when it is not supported by any document or by any affidavit of the person who had done the job of explaining or translation. We have pointed out in several cases that courts frown on detention without trial and insist on the strict compliance of the constitutional safeguards enshrined in Article 22(5) to the letter of the law, because a non-compliance of these safeguards would itself be sufficient to vitiate the order of detention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
