T N UNNIKRISHNAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By an order dated 29th June, 1985 passed by the Government of India under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 the petitioner came to be detained on 14th March, 1986. The detention was directed with a view to prevent him from indulging in any activity prejudicial to the augmentation of the foreign -exchange. The incident on which the detention is based is dated 10/5/1985. Earlier the petitioner was granted bail by court of law on 27/6/1985.

(2.) There is no need for me to detail broad facts of the incident that ultimately culminated the detention of the detenu. Mr. Herjinder Singh arguing the petition for the petitioner has mainly raised three contentions and the fate of the petition depends upon the out-come of the contentions raised. The first contention of Mr. Herjinder Singh is that there has been a considerable delay in consideration of his representation. This ground he has specifically raised in the petition and the grounds. This contention has been met by the other side in their counter at paras 12 to 17 which are as under :-

(3.) Mr. Herjinder Singh has further urged that he made representation to the Central Government on 2/8/1986 in which apart from other facts he also requested the Central Government to supply legible copies of the documents. His submission is that earlier while the grounds of detention were conveyed to him legible copies were not supplied to him and the detaining authority is bound to supply him legible copies of the documents even without asking of the detenu. He states that this was aconstitutional obligation cast upon the detaining authority as he had a right to get legible copies of these documents under Article 22(5) of the Constitution and if for any reason he is deprived of the right,, the detention stands vitiated.