SARFARAZ ALAM V. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS VIZ-A-VIZ PREVENTIVE DETENTION

Abstract

Sarfaraz Alam v. Union of India and Others^[1] is a Special Leave Petition filed under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution dealing with the preventive detention. The SLP has been filed by the brother in law of the detenue questioning the detention. The case was decided on 4 January 2024 by the Apex Court of the country. The decision was given by the Honorable Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice M.M. Sundresh. The present matter dealt with the requirement for detention as provided by the Article 22(5) of the Indian Constitution. The Court at length has discussed how serving the grounds times and effectively are the sine qua non of the right of the detenue to make a representation to object the order of the detention. Article 22(5) bounds detaining authority to make sure that the communication whether verbal or written in the language understandable by the detenue is of paramount importance and the failure to do so would lead the court to bend in favour towards the detenue.  The court has emphasized on communication as being the first step to ensure that the detaining authority does not work in a manner that would blur the rights of the detenue.

Sarfaraz Alam v. Union of India and Others^[1] is a Special Leave Petition filed under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution dealing with the preventive detention. The SLP has been filed by the brother in law of the detenue questioning the detention. The case was decided on 4 January 2024 by the Apex Court of the country. The decision was given by the Honorable Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice M.M. Sundresh. The present matter dealt with the requirement for detention as provided by the Article 22(5) of the Indian Constitution. The Court at length has discussed how serving the grounds times and effectively are the sine qua non of the right of the detenue to make a representation to object the order of the detention. Article 22(5) bounds detaining authority to make sure that the communication whether verbal or written in the language understandable by the detenue is of paramount importance and the failure to do so would lead the court to bend in favour towards the detenue.  The court has emphasized on communication as being the first step to ensure that the detaining authority does not work in a manner that would blur the rights of the detenue.