Detention orders are upheld when procedural safeguards are followed, and the detaining authority establishes a reasonable belief of the detainee's involvement in smuggling activities and potential release on bail.

JUDGMENT :

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

1.This Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) is filed by Smt. Priyanka Sarkariya, petitioner and cousin of the detenue Shri Sahil Sarkariya Jain seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus to declare the detention order dated 22.04.2025, issued under Section 3(1) of the CONSERVATION OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE AND PREVENTION OF SMUGGLING ACTIVITIES ACT , 1974 ("COFEPOSA Act" for short), as illegal.

2. We have heard Shri. T. Chezhiyan, learned Counsel along with Shri Karthik N, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri. Kuloor Arvind Kamath, learned Additonal Solicitor General of India along with Shri. Shanthi Bhushan H, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.1 and Shri. Thejesh P, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No. 2.

3. The facts of the case are as follows:-

Smt. Harshavardini Ranya, was intercepted on 03.03.2025 at the Green Channel of the Kempegowda International Airport, Bengaluru while attempting to leave the Airport after arrival from Dubai without making any declaration. A personal search revealed that she was attempting to smuggle 17 foreign- marked gold bars weighing approximately 14,213.050 grams of foreign origin gold brought from Dubai into India. Her voluntary statement was recorded on 04.03.2025. Thereafter, a search was conducted at her residence and cash of Rs.2,67,00,000/- and jewellary worth Rs.2,06,00,000/- along with two customs declaration were seized. Further, voluntary statements of Shri. Tarun Konduru Raju, who was implicated by the detenue and Shri. Sahil Sarkariya Jain, the detenue herein and several others were recorded. Based on these and other materials procured during the course of investigation a detention order under Section 3(3) of the COFESPOSA Act was passed on 22.04.2025.

4. The detenue’s statements were recorded subsequently between 25.03.2025 and 02.04.2025. According to the grounds of detention, on four occasions the detenue allegedly admitted to assisting Smt. Harshavardhini Ranya in disposing smuggled gold and in facilitating Hawala transfers to Dubai.

5. The detenue’s bail application before the Special Court for Economic Offences was rejected on 15.04.2025. Thereafter, on 22.04.2025, the detaining authority passed the impugned detention order under Section 3(1) of COFEPOSA Act (F.No.PD-12001/03/2025-COFEPOSA). The grounds of detention were served on the detenue on 23.04.2025 while he was in judicial custody.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there is absolutely no material connecting the detenue to 03.03.2025 or 04.03.2025 transaction. There is no evidence to show the involvement of the detenue in the airport seizure or in any other transaction except four occasions allegedly admitted by him for November 2024, December 2024, January 2025, and February 2025.

7. It is further contended that all relied upon documents were not supplied to the detenue to enable him to make an effective and meaningful representation. Further, irrelevant and extraneous materials have been taken into consideration for passing the order of detention.

8. It is further contended that the detenue's involvement is alleged to have been traced only from digital evidence and subsequent statements dated 25.03.2025 to 02.04.2025, in which, he stated that he was an intermediary to Smt. Harshavardini Ranya and Shri. Avinash and has transferred hawala money on four occasions: