Listen to this article:

The Supreme Court has a great opportunity to prevent and stop manifold injustices caused to detenus under various preventive detention laws. I have in mind the preventive detention of Sonam Wangchuk. I hope the court grabs the opportunity with both hands and makes it clear to the Executive that preventive detention is distinct from punitive detention.

Preventive detention laws are enacted for application in rare cases, if not in the rarest of rare cases. Yes, the Maintenance of Security Act (MISA) was abused during the Emergency years when thousands were detained to prevent them from committing an offence endangering internal security. But our judges stood up to the injustice and 9 of the 11 high courts quashed the preventive detention orders. (The other two high courts perhaps had no such cases before them). MISA was subsequently repealed in 1978.

The Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) was used and abused in the 1980s and 1990s when gold and other valuable items were smuggled by carriers (called mules) who would use a suitcase with a fake or collapsible bottom for smuggling; some would swallow drugs safely packed in a plastic bag or hide gold biscuits in the rectum. Dozens were caught while trying to smuggle and preventively detained, but their handlers, big fish, always got away. The courts appreciated the damage these smugglers caused to the economy. But all judges gave greater importance to the injustice caused by the denial of constitutional rights and civil liberties of the detenus without a trial and relied on procedural flaws to release them.

Not once did the courts delve into the merits of the allegations made against the detenus. The reason was simple. The........

© The Wire