VIJAY KUMAR DHARNA ALIAS KOKA Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(SC)-1990-2-49
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: DELHI)
Decided on February 09,1990

VIJAY KUMAR DHARNA ALIAS KOKA Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

SURINDER KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-1995-1-3] [REFERRED TO]
ARIF U PATEL VS. JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE [LAWS(MAD)-1994-11-14] [REFERRED TO]
MEENA JAYENDRA THAKUR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(BOM)-1995-1-36] [REFERRED TO]
SUKERTI VIRENDRA SOOD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1996-3-85] [REFERRED TO]
SOHRAB ALI KHAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1998-10-63] [REFERRED TO]
SOUD AHMED JUBBER KHAN VS. O P BALI [LAWS(BOM)-1999-3-37] [REFERRED TO]
FEHMIDA IQBAL SHAIKH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2000-3-83] [REFERRED TO]
M Perumal VS. State of Tamil Nadu [LAWS(MAD)-2003-11-152] [REFERRED TO]
SAMIULLA ABDUL RAZAK BAIG VS. M N SINGH COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [LAWS(BOM)-2002-4-122] [REFERRED TO]
A PILLAYAR VS. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2006-2-353] [REFERRED TO]
RENGASHAMY SASIHARAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2008-2-14] [REFERRED TO]
NASIR MAQBUL SHAIKH VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [LAWS(BOM)-2010-8-156] [REFERRED TO]
DILIP KUMAR JAIN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(RAJ)-1995-10-17] [REFERRED TO]
MEHRUNNISA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(PAT)-2001-2-55] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH NEEMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-1992-3-7] [REFERRED TO]
SANGITA BALA JADHAV VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2011-11-46] [REFERRED TO]
MAYA AJIT SATAM VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2012-8-110] [REFERRED TO]
K. THILAGAVATHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2014-7-13] [REFERRED TO]
PRADEEP PANCHAL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2013-10-254] [REFERRED TO]
MUTHULAKSHMI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2014-9-169] [REFERRED TO]
SAJITHA BANU/NAZUM BANU VS. JOINT SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, ETC. AND ANOTHER [LAWS(MAD)-1994-12-75] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY AGARWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-8-382] [REFERRED TO]
YALLYA @ SAGAR IRAPPA KOLANATTI VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, PUNE CITY [LAWS(BOM)-2019-10-86] [REFERRED TO]
VICKY SATYAWAN CHAVAN VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [LAWS(BOM)-2020-1-144] [REFERRED TO]
RUTUGNA ARVINDKUMAR TRIVEDI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2020-7-54] [REFERRED TO]
MUNNA GOYAL VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2020-11-170] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT KISAN MEKALE VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, SOLAPUR [LAWS(BOM)-2021-9-2] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Ahmadi, J. - (1.)Special leave granted.
(2.)By an order dated July 13, 1989 passed under S. 3(l) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchance and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), the appellant was detained with a view to preventing him from abetting the smuggling of goods. The appellant challenged his detention by a writ petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Delhi which, however, came to be dismissed on December 12, 1989. The appellant has, therefore, approached this Court by special leave which we have granted.
(3.)The learned counsel for the appellant. submitted that the appellant who knows the Gurmukhi script only was supplied with copies of the detention order and grounds of detention in that language along with the detention order and grounds of detention in English. He submitted that the detention order and the grounds of detention in Gurmukhi are at variance apart from they being at variance with the English version also. According to him because of this discrepancy he was unable to effectively represent against the impugned detention order. There is considerable force in this contention.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.