JUDGMENT

Leave granted.

1A. Both the above appeal and writ petition are directed by Smt. Kusum Chandrakant Khaushe who is the wife of the detenu, namely, Chandrakant Mahadev Khaushe.

2. The detenu, Chandrakant Mahadev Khaushe is detained under the strength of the order of detention passed by the Secretary (Preventive Detection) to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department who is the respondent No. 1 in both the matters in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-sec. (i) of S. 3 of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with a view to preventing the detenu from engaging in transporting smuggled goods.

3. In the wee hours of 22nd July 1990, the custom officers posted at the Sahar International Airport, Bombay found two special equipment boxes bearing Nos. 20 and 21 being abnormally heavy which boxes were kept in the special compartment in the bulk cargo hold on the rear side of the aircraft which had earlier arrived from Tokyo as Flight No. AI 309. On suspicion, the seals of the boxes were broken. On opening the special equipment box No. 20 in the presence of witnesses, two jackets of navy blue colour cloth having 16 compartments each were found. From the abovesaid two jackets, 128 gold bars weighing 14920.80 grams were recovered. From box No. 21, the customs officers removed 9 gold spanners collectively weighing 10,000 grams. From the two other metallic boxes, the custom officers further found 24 gold bars weighing 24000 grams. The total weight of the gold was found to be of 48,924.80 grams, the local market of which was estimated as on that date at Rupees 1,61,45,184/. The statement of the detenu who was working as Storekeeper at the material time in the Stores and Purchase Department of Air India was recorded under S. 108 of the Customs Act on two occasions, namely on the 22nd and 23rd of July 1990 wherein the detenu has stated that he knew one Vinod Michael who was working with Air India since last 8 years and that the said Vinod Michael offered him job of taking gold spanner from the special equipment boxes two months prior to the incident for a suitable remuneration and that he did so on three occasions and delivered the contraband to the said Vinod Michael. Regarding the seized gold, the detenu has stated that the said Vinod Michael telephoned him on 19-7-90 informing him that mal would be coming on 21st July 1990 on Tokyo Flight No. AI 309. The detenu brought the gold with the help of one Pol, a cleaner in the Department. The officials. of the Customs Department took statements from various persons inclusive of the abovesaid Pol under S. 108 of the Customs Act on 22-7-90. The entire contraband was seized and a panchnama in the presence of witnesses was prepared.

4. The detenu and the said Pol were arrested and produced before the Magistrate on 23rd July 1990 and were remanded to the judicial custody. However, they came out on bail on 3-9-90 and 12-9-90 respectively. The impugned order of detention as against the detenu was passed on 11th January 1991 which order was served on the detenu on 12th January 1991 along with the grounds of detention and list of documents annexed thereto.

5. On being aggrieved by the order of detention, the present petitioner (the wife of the detenu) filed a writ petition which was numbered as Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 147/91 before the High Court of Bombay challenging the validity of the detention order on many grounds but the High Court rejected all those grounds and dismissed the writ petition as devoid of any merit. Hence the present appeal. Along with this appeal, the petitioner has also filed Writ Petition No. 1234/91 challenging the very same order of detention. Hence we are rendering a common judgment in both the matters.

6. According to Shri R. K. Jain, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, the omission or failure on the part of the sponsoring authority to place the order of suspensio