SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(SC) 71

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.C. RAY, KULDIP SINGH AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.
Dharmendra Suganchand Chelawat and another , Appellants
Versus
Union of India and others, Respondents
Criminal Appeals Nos. 11 and 12 of 1990, D/- 9-2-1990.

Advocates:
B.PARTHASARTHY, Harjinder Singh, LATA KRISHNAMURTHY, N.N.JOHARI, P.P.Rao, R.N.JOSHI, SOLI J.SORABJI, Uma Nath Singh

Headnote:Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988- Section 3(1)- Detaining authority passed orders for detaining the accused persons (who were already in custody) with a view to preventing them from engaging in the transportation and abetting in the export inter-state of psychotropic substances Constitution of India- Article 226- High Court dismissed the detenus - writ petitions for Weas corpus- Article 136- Detenus, by spedalleave, appealed against the judgement of the High Court- Sessions Judge rejected bail-applications moved by the appeilants a few days prior to the passing of the orders of detention- There was not a reasonable prospect of the appeUants being released from custody at the time when the detention orders were passed- Whether the impugned orders can be sustained? (No). (Paras 1 & 22)

JUDGMENT

S. C. AGRAWAL, J.:- These appeals, by special leave, arise out of the judgment of the High Court of Delhi whereby the writ petitions filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution to challenge the legality of the orders dated October 11, 1988 passed under S. 3(l) of the Prevention of illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for the detention of the appellants have been dismissed. This Court by the order dated January 11, 1990 allowed the appeals and after setting aside the orders of detention dated October 11, 1988 directed that the appellants be set at liberty forthwith and that reasoned judgment would follow. We are hereby indicating our reasons for the order passed on January 11, 1990.

2. Dharmendra Suganchand Chelawat (the Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 11/90) hereinafter referred to as Dharmendra is the son of Suganchand Kanhaiyyalal Chelawat (the Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 1990) hereinafter referred to as Suganchand. In the grounds of detention furnished to the appellants it is stated that on September 21, 1988 the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Bombay Zonal Unit, searched the godown of Siddharth Trotters Pvt. Ltd., Kothari Mansion, at 357, S.V.P. Road, Bombay and five card board cartons containing in all 2,51,000 mandrax tablets weighing 125.5 Kgs. and valued at Rs. 7,53,000/- were seized from there. During the follow-up investigation the officers of the Central Excise & Customs searched the premises of Suganchand at Indore (M.P.) which resulted in the recovery of 51 Kgs. of mandrax tablets from a Maruti Van parked in the house compound on September 22/23, 1988 which was seized. In addition to 20.500 Kgs. of mandrax tablets, 148.300 Kgs. of methaqualone powder and 97.700 Kgs. of white powder was recovered from the residence itself. Suganchand in his statement which was recorded on September 23, 1988 stated that he had manufactured mandrax tablets at his factory at Indore and that he was assisted by his son, Dharmendra. Suganchand was arrested on September 23, 1988 and produced before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Indore on September. 24, 1988 who remanded him to the police custody till September 30, 1988. On September 30, 1988 Suganchand was remanded to judicial custody till October 13, 1988. A bail application was submitted by Suganchand in the Sessions Court on September 28, 1988 and the same was rejected by the Sessions Court on October 1, 1988.

2A. Dharmendra was arrested on October 4, 1988 and he was remanded to the police custody up to October 5, 1988. On October 5, 1988 he was remanded to judicial custody till October 13, 1988. During the course of arguments Shri Harjinder Singh, the learned counsel for the appellants, stated that a bail application was submitted on behalf of Dharmendra and the same was rejected on October 5, 1988.

3. On October 11, 1988 orders were passed by Shri K. L. Verma, Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, under S. 3(l) of the Act for the detention of the appellants. In the order of detention the detaining authority has stated that he was satisfied from the record of the case with respect to the appellants that with a view to preventing them from engaging in the transportation and abetting in the export interstate of Psychotropic Substances it is necessary to make the order directing that the appellants be detained and kept in custody. The said order of detention was served on appellants on October 13, 1988 while they were in custody. The appellants were also served with the grounds of detention dated October 11, 1988 as well as the documents on which reliance was placed by the detaining authority.

4. Writ petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India were filed by Kumari Archana Chelawat, the daughter of Suganchand and sister of Dharmendra, wherein the legality of the detention of the appellants was challenged before t


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top