SMT. POONAM LATA versus M.L. WADHAWAN & ANR.

SMT. POONAM LATA versus M.L. WADHAWAN & ANR.

The writ petition fails as the detaining authority was aware that the detenu was already in custody and had sufficient material to justify preventive detention; absence of written summons under section 108 of Customs Act does not vitiate representation as none existed.

Parties
Petitioner: SMT. Poonam Lata; Respondent: M.L. Wadhawan & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 August 1987
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (criminal) Under Article 32 / Final Disposition
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
COFEPOSA Detention, Detention While in Custody, Supply of Documents to Detenu, Exclusion of Parole Period, Article 32 Jurisdiction
Preventive Detention Customs Law Constitutional Law COFEPOSA Detention Detention While in Custody Supply of Documents to Detenu Exclusion of Parole Period Article 32 Jurisdiction

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SMT. Poonam Lata

Petitioner

M.L. Wadhawan & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (criminal) Under Article 32 / Final Disposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the period of parole should be added to the period of detention under COFEPOSA
  2. 2 Whether failure to supply a copy of summons under section 108 of Customs Act prejudiced detenu's representation
  3. 3 Whether order of preventive detention is vitiated when the detenu is already in judicial custody

Ratio Decidendi

The writ petition fails as the detaining authority was aware that the detenu was already in custody and had sufficient material to justify preventive detention; absence of written summons under section 108 of Customs Act does not vitiate representation as none existed.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • The writ petition is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.