SAMIULLAH ALIAS HAJI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is detained under the COFEPOSA pursuant to an order of detention dated 31.7.1995. The order was executed on the same day. This writ petition has been filed on 2nd September, 1995. Various points have been raised on behalf of the detenu. One of the points is that the detenu, through his lawyer, has sent 7 copies of representation to the jail authorities on 21.8.1995. The representations were unsigned and addresses to which the copies were to be sent were no doubt not mentioned. Thereafter, the Superintendent, Tihar Jail, wrote a letter on 24.8.1995, to the petitioner's Advocate stating that the unsigned letter of the Advocate with 7 copies of the unsigned represention were received and that the Advocate was requested to specify the names of authorities to whom the represenations were to be forwarded. All the 7 copies were therefore returned to the counsel to do the needful. Thereafter, the counsel addressed a letter dated 24.8.1995 to the Superintendent, Jail no. 1, Central Jail, as follows:

(2.) Thereafter, the Superintendent, Jail sent a letter dated 30.8.1995 to the petitioner's counsel stating that they have received the 7 copies of the representation, and that after getting them signed by detenu, three copies of representation have been forwarded to Advisory Board and one copy has been forwarded to Detaining Authority, Central Government and one copy has been kept in record as office copy. Rest of the two copies were sent back along with that letter.

(3.) A point has been raised on behalf of the petitioner that when 7 copies were there, and three were forwarded to the Advisory Board and one to the detaining authority and one kept in office of the Tihar jail, there was no reason why two copies should have been sent back to the petitioner. At least from the two copies, one should have been forwarded to the Central Government. The point also is raised that even though the representation sent to the detaining authority was disposed of by the Joint Secretary on 4.10.1995, and the file was sent to the Central Government, the Central Government rejected the same on 16.10.1995, which did not meet the requirements of Article 22(5) of the Constitution read with COFEPOSA Act. According to the petitioner, a copy not having been sent to the Central Government directly vitiated the entire proceedings. There are at least three authorities of the Supreme Court B.Alamelu v. State of T.N. and others, 1995 SCC (crl) 224, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Narendra Pandurang Kadam and others, 1995 SCC (Crl) 228, and Jaiparkash v. District Magistrate, Bulandshahar, UP and others, 1993 SCC (Crl) 121, where the detenus sent the representations to the jail authorities for forwarding the same to the various authorities.