Court finds unexplained delay in considering detenu's representation breaches constitutional rights under Articles 21 and 22(5)
In a significant judgment, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that the continued detention of Cheemparthi Fakruddin, the husband of petitioner Cheemparthi Shaheen, is impermissible due to unexplained delays in handling his representation against a preventive detention order. The court emphasized the breach of constitutional rights under Articles 21 and 22(5) due to the delay, rendering further detention illegal.
The judgment arose from the habeas corpus writ petition filed by Cheemparthi Shaheen challenging the detention of her husband under the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986. The detention order, approved by the state, was issued by the Collector & District Magistrate, Y.S.R. Kadapa District, citing eight pending criminal cases against Fakruddin.
Despite the detention order allowing for representation, Fakruddin's representation dated October 27, 2025, was only rejected on January 6, 2026, during the writ petition's pendency. The court noted that after receiving remarks from the District Collector on December 3, 2025, a delay of 32 days ensued before the representation was addressed. This delay, along with the initial time taken to call for remarks, was deemed unreasonable and unexplained, violating the detenu's fundamental rights.
The judgment referenced several Supreme Court rulings emphasizing the necessity of expeditious handling of representations in detention cases, highlighting that any unexplained delay breaches constitutional imperatives and makes continued detention illegal.
The court did not delve into other grounds for challenging the detention order, focusing solely on the unexplained delay in representation handling. It ordered the immediate release of Cheemparthi Fakruddin, subject to any other judicial custody orders.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual liberties and ensuring adherence to constitutional mandates in preventive detention cases.
Bottom line:-
Preventive detention - Unexplained delay in considering representation against detention order violates constitutional rights under Article 21 and Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India - Continued detention becomes impermissible.
Statutory provision(s): Article 21, Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India
Cheemparthi Shaheen v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (Andhra Pradesh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2941422
