SHABNA ABDULLA versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2024] 8 S.C.R. 460 · Decided: 20-08-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 8 S.C.R. 460 : 2024 INSC 612
Shabna Abdulla 
v. 
The Union of India & Ors.
(Criminal Appeal No. 3082 of 2024)
20 August 2024
[B.R. Gavai,* Prashant Kumar Mishra and  
K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the 
Division Bench of the High Court dismissing the writ petition filed 
by the detenue’s sister-in-law challenging the detention order as 
well as the confirmation of detention on the ground of non-supply 
of relevant documents and thus, sought release of the detenue, 
when the coordinate Bench of the same High Court had allowed 
the writ petitions filed by the co-accused persons challenging the 
same detention order holding that documents relied upon in the 
detention orders ought to have been furnished to the detenus 
when they requested for the same, thus, the non-supply had vitally 
affected the right of the detenus and detention order was bad.
Headnotes†
Judicial discipline – Principles of – Detention orders u/s. 3 
of COFEPOSA against the detenue and three co-accused 
persons for the alleged seizure of contraband gold and arrested 
thereafter – Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the 
Writ Petition filed by the detenue’s sister-in-law challenging 
the detention order as well as the confirmation of detention 
on the ground of non-supply of relevant documents and thus, 
sought release of the detenue, when the coordinate Bench of 
the same High Court had allowed the writ petitions filed by 
the co-accused persons challenging the same detention order 
holding that documents sought had been relied upon in the 
detention orders and the same ought to have been furnished 
to the detenus when they requested for the same, thus, the 
non-supply had vitally affected the right of the detenus and 
the detention order was bad – Correctness:
* Author
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 
461
Shabna Abdulla v. The Union of India & Ors.
Held: Division Bench of the High Court while passing the 
impugned judgment and order should have followed the view 
taken by another Division Bench of the same High Court 
specifically when the grounds of detention and the grounds 
of challenge were identical in both the cases – In the event, 
the Division Bench of the High Court was of the view that the 
earlier decision of the Coordinate Bench of the same High 
Court was not correct in law, the only option available to it 
was to refer the matter to a larger Bench – Division Bench of 
the High Court in the while rejecting the case of the detenue, 
observed that the detaining authority had arrived at a subjective 
satisfaction on the basis of various documents and that non-
supply of the WhatsApp chats would not vitiate the detention 
order, thus, held that the findings of the Coordinate Bench of 
the same High Court in the cases of the co-accused could not 
be followed in the instant case – When the Coordinate Bench of 
the same High Court based on same grounds of detention and 
on the  basis of the same material, which was relied on by the 
detaining authority, had come to a considered conclusion that 
non-supply of certain documents had vitiated the right to make 
an effective representation of the detenus, another Coordinate 
Bench could not have ignored the same – Second Division 
Bench has sought to justify its decision by holding that the 
findings in the cases of co-accused and other connected matters 
would not be applicable to it since the detaining authority had 
also taken into consideration the other material while arriving 
at its subjective satisfaction – However, it is to be noted that 
if that was so in the case of present detenue, that was also 
so in the cases of other detenus – Thus, the detention order 
as also order of confirmation of detention order quashed and 
set aside – Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of 
Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. [Paras 12, 15-18]
Case Law Cited
Official Liquidator v. Dayanand and Others [2008] 15 SCR 331 : 
(2008) 10 SCC 1; Nushath Koyamu v. Union of India and Others 
[2022 (3) KLT 885] – referred to.
List of Acts
Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling 
Activities Act, 1974; Constitution of India.
462
[2024] 8 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
List of Keywords
Detention order; Confirmation of detention order; Non-supply of 
relevant documents; Release of detenue; Coordinate Bench of 
the High Court; Seizure of contraband gold; Reference to larger 
Bench; Copies of the WhatsApp chats.
Case Aris

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.