In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India quashed the detention order issued under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA), against Abdul Raoof, who was implicated in a gold smuggling case. The appeal, Criminal Appeal No. 3082 of 2024, was filed by Shabna Abdulla, the sister-in-law of the detenue, challenging the High Court of Keralaโs decision to uphold the detention order.
The case revolves around a gold smuggling incident where contraband gold weighing 14,763.30 grams, valued at โน7.16 crore, was seized from the unaccompanied baggage of one Althaf Moosan Mukri on April 20, 2021. Subsequent investigations revealed that Abdul Raoof, residing in Dubai, was allegedly involved in smuggling gold into India concealed in compressors of refrigerators. Following this, detention orders were issued against Abdul Raoof and three other co-accused under Section 3 of COFEPOSA on August 24, 2021.
Legal Issues Involved:
The primary legal issue centered around the non-supply of WhatsApp chat records relied upon by the detaining authority to Abdul Raoof, which was crucial for his defense. The detenu argued that the failure to provide these documents impaired his constitutional right under Article 22(5) to make an effective representation against the detention order.
The High Court of Kerala, in a prior judgment dated June 3, 2022, had quashed the detention orders against the three co-accused on similar grounds, ruling that the non-supply of documents vitally affected their right to representation. However, a different Division Bench of the same High Court dismissed Abdul Raoofโs petition on January 24, 2023, leading to the current appeal before the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court’s Decision:
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, and Justice K.V. Viswanathan held that the High Court erred in not following the earlier decision of its Coordinate Bench, which had quashed the detention orders of the co-accused on identical grounds. The Court emphasized the importance of judicial discipline and consistency, noting that predictability and certainty are crucial hallmarks of judicial jurisprudence.
The Court observed, โWhen the Coordinate Bench of the same High Court, based on the same grounds of detention and the same material, which was relied on by the detaining authority, had come to a considered conclusion that non-supply of certain documents had vitiated the right to make an effective representation, another Coordinate Bench could not have ignored the same.โ
Consequently, the Supreme Court quashed both the detention order dated August 24, 2021, and its confirmation dated May 24, 2022. The ruling underscores the necessity for detaining authorities to ensure that all relevant documents, especially those relied upon in the detention order, are supplied to the detenu to facilitate their constitutional right to representation.
Also Read
Case Details
– Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 3082 of 2024
– Appellant: Shabna Abdulla
– Detenue: Abdul Raoof
– Respondent: Union of India & Ors.
– Bench: Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
– Lawyers: Mr. Raghenth Basant, Senior Counsel for the appellant; Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Senior Counsel for the respondent
