JUDGMENT
Arun B. Saharya, J.
(1) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of habeas corpus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature therof to quash an order dated 17th of August 1990 made by Shri Mahendra Prased, specially empowered officer of the Central Government, for his detention under Section 3(1) of the Cofeposa Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods.
(2) The grounds of detention together with relied upon documents were served upon the petitioner along with the order of his detention.
(3) The detention order has been challenged on various grounds. It is however, unnecessary to enumerate the same as learned counsel for the petitioner has pressed only of them at the time of hearing.
(4) He has contended that the detention order should be set aside as some of the relied upon documents furnished to the detenu were illegible. The relevant plea taken in ground No.XII in the writ petition is reproduced below:-
"THAT the detenu says and submits that pages No. 4,6,7, 28to35, 36,37,61, 71 to 87, 106 to 113, 116 to 123 127, 143 to 145 , 147 to 161 of English set of documents are illegible. It is submitted that the non supply of legible copies of documents virtually amounted to non supply of relied upon documents. Therefore, on this count also the impugned detention order is liable to be quashed."
(5) In response to Rule Nisi, the detaining authority merely denied the above-stated averments and maintained that copies of the documents supplied to the petitioner were legible. Reply to grounds No.XII reads- "SUBMISSION is denied. Copies of document were legible. The allegation is put forth only to substantiate the claim, without having any base, that justice was not properly done to the detenu."
(6) Learned counsel for the petitioner produced, at the time of hearing, the set of documents supplied to the detenu. The same were shown to counsel for the respondent. On examination, it is found that some of the documents are illegible Portions of one of the documents purporting to be a search memo, mentioned at serial No.5 of the list of documents relied upon, at page No.6 of the set of documents supplied to the petitioner absolutely illegible.
(7) Supply of illegible copies of relied upon documents, in fact, means non-supply thereof. There is thus a clear violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and Section 8 of the Act inasmuch as the petitioner was not supplied with all the documents relied upon by the detaining authority within the prescribed period. On this ground alone, the detention order has to be quashed.
(8) Consequently, the Rule is made absolute. The impugned order is quashed and the petitioner's detention is set aside. The petitioner should be set at liberty at once unless he is required to be kept in custody for any other cause.
(9) The petition is, accordingly, allowed.
