MST. L.M.S. UMMU SALBBMA versus B.B. GUJARAL & ANR.

MST. L.M.S. UMMU SALBBMA versus B.B. GUJARAL & ANR.

Failure to supply copies of documents not relied upon in making the order of detention does not violate Article 22(5). There was no unreasonable delay in consideration of the detenu's representation. The detenu failed to establish that a letter of retraction was sent or that it was not considered. The detention order is valid.

Parties
Petitioner: Mst. L.M.S. Ummu Salebma; First Respondent: B.B. Gujral; Second Respondent: Union of India
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 May 1981
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Decision on Merits
Outcome
Writ Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Preventive Detention – Supply of Grounds, Delay in Consideration of Representation, Constitution of India Article 22(5), Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974
Constitutional Law Preventive Detention Criminal Law Preventive Detention – Supply of Grounds Delay in Consideration of Representation Constitution of India Article 22(5) Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mst. L.M.S. Ummu Salebma

Petitioner

B.B. Gujral

First Respondent

Union of India

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Decision on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to furnish copies of all documents referred to in grounds of detention vitiates the detention under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether delay in consideration of the detenu's representation by the detaining authority vitiates the detention.
  3. 3 Whether the detaining authority must consider prosecution under ordinary law before directing preventive detention.

Ratio Decidendi

Failure to supply copies of documents not relied upon in making the order of detention does not violate Article 22(5). There was no unreasonable delay in consideration of the detenu's representation. The detenu failed to establish that a letter of retraction was sent or that it was not considered. The detention order is valid.

Court Disposition

Writ Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Writ Petition is dismissed; detention is upheld