The Supreme Court has issued a significant ruling, defining the scope and duration of preventive detention in cases where an advisory board confirms the necessity for such detention.
The Court held that the constitutional scheme limiting preventive detention to three months does not apply when an advisory board confirms the grounds for detention.
The verdict, delivered by a bench consisting of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, also addressed the requirement for periodic review of detention orders by state governments.
The interpretation revolved around Article 22(4) of the Constitution, which safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention. The article specifies that "No law providing for preventive detention shall authorise the detention of a person for a longer period than three months unless an Advisory Board consisting of persons who are qualified to be appointed as Judges of a High Court has reported sufficient cause for such detention."
The Court affirmed that the three-month limitation pertains solely to the initial period of detention until the advisory board's report is received. The period following the state government's confirmatory order, based on the board's report, is not subject to the same three-month restriction. The bench clarified that the continuation of detention pursuant to the state government's confirmatory order need not specify a detention period and is not restricted to three months.
"If any period is specified in the confirmatory order, then the period of detention would be up to such period; if no period is specified, then it would be for a maximum period of twelve months from the date of detention. The state government, in our view, need not review the orders of detention every three months after it has passed the confirmatory order," the judgment stated.
The Court's decision was prompted by an appeal filed by Pesala Nookaraju, who was detained under the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986. The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld the detention order, and the Supreme Court concurred, stating that the advisory board's confirmation permits a detainee to be held for up to twelve months without a mandatory three-month review.
The Court emphasized that the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction, based on credible material, is pivotal in determining the necessity for preventive detention.
Source: Link
Picture Source :
