PARAMJIT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Paramjit Singh was detained in Central Tail, Tihar, New Delhi, under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (as amended) under the order of detention dated 18th November, 1985 passed by Shri K. K. Dwivedi. Joint Secretary to the Government of India, specially empowered in that behalf.

(2.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the quashing of the detention order passed against him and for a direction by way of writ or otherwise for his immediate release from detention. The order of detention was passed bv the detaining authority with a view to preventing him from dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by concealing or keeping smuggled goods and engaging in transporting smuggled goods. It would be unnecessary to set out the petitioner's alleged activities on the basis of which this detention order was passed.

(3.) The main ground urged by Mr. Harjinder Singh Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner knew much less of English language for which reason he had been supplied copies of the order of detention, grounds of detention and other various documents in Gurmukhi script together with the same in English, and that the language which he knew very well was only Punjabi in Gurmukhi script. He has pointed out that there was nothing wrong with the English versions of any of these but wrong was there in respect of the papers supplied to him in Gurmukhi script inasmuch as the order of retention in Gurmukhi script supplied to him did not pertain to him but to one Mohd. Akram son of M. Haji Sultan whereas the grounds of detention in Gurmukhi script supplied to him did not pertain to him but to a co-detenu Ganga Ram Kapoor. His contention was that on account of the aforesaid infirmities he was prejudiced in the exercise of his conititutional right, as guaranteed under Cause (5) of Article 22 of the Constitution of India, in making a purposeful and an effective representation to the detaining authority. This constitutional provision reads as fellows :-