Detaining Authority Has Exclusive Responsibility To Formulate Grounds Of Detention, Investigating Agency Can Only..
๐น Key Principle
In preventive detention matters, the detaining authority must independently apply its mind and arrive at a decision whether to detain a person, based on materials available. The investigating agency (police, enforcement agencies, etc.) may collect and submit the material, but cannot dictate or prepare the "grounds of detention".
This is because:
Preventive detention is not punitive, but precautionary.
The subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority is paramount.
Non-application of mind by the detaining authority, or outsourcing the formulation of grounds, invalidates the detention.
๐น Detailed Explanation
1. Exclusive Responsibility of the Detaining Authority
The detaining authority must formulate the grounds of detention on its own satisfaction.
This subjective satisfaction must be based on application of mind to the material placed before it.
If the grounds are simply adopted or copied from a third party (like police reports or investigation files) without independent reasoning, the detention is illegal.
2. Investigating Agency's Role is Limited
The investigating agencyโs role is to collect evidence, record statements, and provide relevant documents or reports.
It cannot author or finalize the grounds of detention.
This is to ensure that the power of preventive detention is not misused by police or investigative officers for coercive purposes.
๐น Key Case Law
โ Ankit Ashok Jalan v. Union of India, (2020) 16 SCC 127
Facts:
Detention order passed under COFEPOSA.
Grounds of detention were essentially lifted from the proposal made by the sponsoring authority (Customs/Investigating agency).
No independent application of mind by the detaining authority.
Held:
Supreme Court quashed the detention order.
It held that the detaining authority must independently scrutinize the material and cannot act as a rubber stamp.
The exclusive responsibility to formulate the grounds of detention lies with the detaining authority.
"The constitutional requirement of application of mind would stand defeated if the detaining authority mechanically adopts the investigation agencyโs proposal without due scrutiny."
โ Icchu Devi Choraria v. Union of India, (1980) 4 SCC 531
Principle:
Preventive detention is a serious invasion of personal liberty.
Any deviation from procedural safeguards or failure of independent satisfaction vitiates the detention.
The Court emphasized the importance of genuine application of mind by the detaining authority.
โ Khudiram Das v. State of West Bengal, (1975) 2 SCC 81
Key Observation:
Courts can interfere when detention is mala fide or based on irrelevant grounds.
If the detaining authority relies blindly on police reports or acts under pressure, the detention is bad in law.
๐น Consequences of Violation
If it is shown that:
The detaining authority did not apply its mind, or
Grounds were prepared by the investigating agency, or
Detention was mechanically approved,
Then the detention order is liable to be quashed by courts.
๐น Summary Table
| Aspect | Detaining Authority | Investigating Agency |
|---|---|---|
| Role | Apply independent mind; issue detention | Collect facts, submit material |
| Authority to Detain | Yes | No |
| Formulate Grounds | Yes โ exclusively its responsibility | No โ cannot formulate |
| Subjective Satisfaction | Mandatory | Not relevant |
| Accountability | Constitutional and judicial scrutiny | Administrative |
๐ Conclusion
The doctrine that the detaining authority alone has the exclusive responsibility to formulate the grounds of detention ensures that liberty is not curtailed arbitrarily and that preventive detention is not used as a tool of harassment. Courts have consistently struck down detention orders where the authority failed to independently assess the necessity of detention or merely acted on the recommendation of the investigating agency.
The investigative agency provides the bricks; it is the detaining authority alone that must build the structure of the detention order.
RELATED Blog
0 comments