AJAY KUMAR ARORA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner challenges the order of detention dated November 4, 1996 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that a representation of the petitioner dated December 2, 1996 was handed over to the Jail authorities for being transmitted to the detaining authority. On December 3, 1996 the representation of the petitioner was forwarded to the detaining authority under despatch number 5946 and the petitioner was informed about the same. On December 6, 1996 the detenu was produced before the Advisory Board when a fresh representation was filed in which the factum of despatch of the representation dated December 3, 1996 to the detaining authority was mentioned. The grievance of the petitioner is that till today the representation dated December 3, 1996 has not been disposed of by the detaining authority.

(3.) The respondent in its counter-affidavit has averred that the representation dated December 2, 1996 was not received by the COFEPOSA Unit. It is further averred that enquiries were made from the Superintendent, Central Jail, Tihar, New Delhi, vide letter dated April 9, 1997 pursuant to which a copy of the representation of the petitioner was received in the COFEPOSA Unit on April 12, 1997. In view of the controversy learned counsel for respondent No.3 was directed to produce the despatch register as well as the peon book of the Central Jail, Tihar. The despatch register and the peon book have been produced by the learned counsel for respondent No.3. As per the despatch register the representation of the petitioner was despatched to the COFEPOSA Unit on December 3, 1996 under despatch number 5946. A perusal of the peon book shows that the representation of the petitioner was delivered in the COFEPOSA Unit on December 4, 1997. In any event, it is the admitted case of the respondent that a copy of the representation of the petitioner was received from the Central Jail, Tihar, on April 12, 1997. Despite the receipt of the representation the same has not been disposed of. The inaction on the part of the respondent in not dealing with the representation of the petitioner has rendered his continued detention illegal. In Dinesh Kumar Goel v. Union of India and others, (Criminal Writ No. 177/95) this Court while dealing with similar situation held as follows :-