VIKRAM NATH, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
Thanesar Singh Sodhi – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Vikram Nath, J.)
These two appeals challenge the impugned orders of the High Court more or less on the same and similar grounds as such have been taken up together and being decided by this common order. In Civil Appeal No.5500 of 2011, challenge is to an order passed by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court dated 26.03.2010 whereby Writ Petition (Civil) No.1212 of 1995 was dismissed confirming the order of forfeiture of properties under section 7 of The Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 19761[SAFEMA]. In Criminal Appeal No.730 of 2014, the challenge is to an order passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 03/17.12.2012 dismissing the Writ Petition No.3878 of 2011 wherein also the order of forfeiture of properties under SAFEMA was upheld.
2. Before the High Court, the main ground of challenge in both the cases was that as the detention order passed under section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 19742[COFEPOSA], has been subsequently revoked/withdrawn as such SAFEMA proceedings would become non est and untenable. An additional ground taken in Civil Appeal No.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.