Article 22(5) | Preventive Detention Order Unconstitutional If All Grounds Of Detention Are Not Communicated To Detenu: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court has reiterated that a preventive detention order shall be rendered unconstitutional for being violative of Article 22 of the Constitution if it does not specify each and every ground based upon which the order of detention was passed against the detenu. While setting aside a preventive detention order issued against the petitioner, who is accused of drugs-peddling, the Division Bench of Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo and Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra observed – “The petitioner was kept in darkness that the Detaining Authority has arrived at its subjective satisfaction also basing on those five cases and therefore, he could not have asked for the documents of such cases to file the representation. The conduct of the Authority in debarring the petitioner to make an effective representation violates the constitutional safeguards enshrined under Article 22 of the Constitution of India.” Referring to the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Daktar Mudi -Vrs.- State of West Bengal the high court said, ".the detention order can be held to be invalid as those five cases which could have influenced the Detaining Authority in arriving at its subjective satisfaction has not been mentioned in the grounds of detention nor communicated to the detenu". Court's Observations The most vital questions which cropped up for consideration were whether the detaining authority took into account the involvement of the detenu only in three NDPS cases as have been mentioned in the grounds of detention or it also considered his involvement in five other cases under the Excise Act and IPC and if the latter is found to be the case, whether the partial withdrawal of grounds of detention relied upon by the authority shall entail the very detention a nullity for being violative of Article 22. Therefore, the Bench held that not only the sponsoring authority has taken into account five other cases apart from the three NDPS cases mentioned in the detention order, but also the detaining authority has reached its subjective satisfaction basing upon eight cases, which were from the year 2005 to 2024 in passing the detention order.