High Court of Delhi
G.S. SISTANI & G.P. MITTAL, JJ.
Sahil Jain
Versus
UOI & Others
W.P. (Crl.) No. 1136 of 2013
Decided On : 13-11-2013
Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 -Section 3 (1) - Customs Act, 1962 - Section 102 - Preventive detention - Material - Consideration of - Preventive detention law is based on suspicion - Court does not sit in Appeal over the subjective satisfaction reached by the Detaining Authority except where the relevant and vital material has not been considered.
Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 - Section 3 (1) - Customs Act, 1962 - Section 102 - Writ of habeas corpus - Detention - Gold jewellery was actually not seized from the Detenue - Seizure of an invoice from the Detenue - Serious allegations of illegal import of high end gold jewellery and misuse of SEZ facility - Show cause notices were not considered by the Detaining Authority - Grounds of detention were not supplied to the Detenue - Adjudication order of detaining authority had not attained finality as an appeal had been preferred by the Commissioner of Customs - Replies to the three show cause notices have been placed on record by the Detenue - Show cause notice is a charter of allegation - Detenue claimed innocence - Replies to the show cause notices were vital, important and relevant material - Without considering these replies, there was a serious prejudice caused to the Detenue - All the relevant and vital material were not placed before the Detaining Authority - Detention order is vitiated - Detention order is set aside - Detenue be released.
G.P. Mittal J.
1. Petitioner Sahil Jain has approached this Court for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus for release of his father Komal Jain, who has been ordered to be detained and kept in custody in the Central Jail, Tihar by an order dated 11.06.2013 issued under Section 3 (1) of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA Act) by the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of India. According to the order dated 11.06.2013, the Joint Secretary was satisfied that the detention of Komal Jain (the Detenue) was necessary with a view to prevent him from smuggling the goods in future.
2. Along with detention order, the Detenue was served with the grounds of detention. Before adverting to the challenge laid by the Petitioner, it will be appropriate to have an insight into the grounds which led to the detention of Komal Jain. According to the Detaining Authority, there was a specific information with the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) that the Detenue, who was holding Indian passport No.K 7271778 issued at Delhi on 14.09.2012, was involved in the smuggling of gold/gold articles and is arranging visits of a national of United Arab Emirates, namely Mr. Mana Saleh Sultan Alsuwaidi, (MSSA), holding diplomatic passport no. P ARE 0025401 issued on 16.03.2010 at Abu Dhabi by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, United Arab Emirates, (UAE). Said MSSA was presently posted as Commercial Attache in UAE Embassy in Delhi. The DRI had specific information that the Detenue would be arriving on 11.03.2013 from Singapore by Flight No.SQ 406 at IGI Airport, New Delhi and would be smuggling in gold/gold articles of foreign origin from Singapore either by himself or carrying the same in the baggage of earlier said MSSA with his consent and knowledge with the intention to misuse the diplomatic immunity available to MSSA.
3. In pursuance of the specific information, the DRI arranged two independent witnesses near the exit gate of the customs arrival hall. On 11.03.2013 at about 6:00 a.m., the DRI officers intercepted the Detenue while he had crossed the green channel in the arrival hall. The Detenue was confronted with the specific information. On conducting Detenue’s personal search, certain documents including an unsigned printed invoice no.54840 dated 09.03.2013 (torn at the bottom) towards the sale of assorted gold jewellery weighing 536.63 gms. (purity 18 Ct.) and 32028.70 gms. (purity 22 Ct.), total gross weight 32565.33 gms., total pure weight 29960.10 gms., valued at US$ 1,581,556.47 issued by M/s. Aspire International Trading LLC, 1001, City Tower 2, Near Crown Plaza Hotel, Sheikh Zayed Road, P.O. Box 118583, Dubai-UAE were found. Thereafter, the DRI officers intercepted another person, namely, MSSA, who was accompanied by a lady passenger Ms. Bahareh Salmani. MSSA was told about the specific information available with the DRI officers. The DRI officers then requested MSSA that in view of the specific intelligence they would like to search his baggage and that MSSA had a legal right to get his baggage examined before a Magistrate or a Gazetted officer of Customs/DRI. MSSA refused to allow the examination of his baggage and claimed diplomatic immunity. Ms. Bahareh Salmani was also requested by the DRI officers to declare the goods being carried by her. She also refused to declare the goods being carried by her in her baggage. Ms. Bahareh Salmani informed the DRI officers that the two baggages being carried by her contained the personal belongings of MSSA. MSSA agreed that the baggages carried by Ms. Bahareh Salmani belonged to him. The DRI officers informed the concerned officers in the Ministry of External Affairs. At about 10:15 a.m. two officers from MEA, namely, Shri Rakesh Adlakha, Deputy Chief of Protocol and Shri Jaladhi Mukherjee, Protocol Officer reached the arrival hall of IGI Airport. Mr. Mansour Mohamed Alijuwaied, Second Secretary from UAE Embassy at New Delhi
Ashadevi v. K. Shivraj, Addl. Chief Secy. to the Govt. of Gujarat & Anr.
Union of India & Ors. v. Manohar Lal Narang
Ahamed Nassar v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. (1999) 8 SCC 473
Rushikesh Tanaji Bhoite v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Radhakrishnan Prabhakaran v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.
Attorney General for India & Ors.. v. Amratlal Prajivandas & Ors. (1994) 5 SCC 54
Sathar Ibrahim Manik v. Union of India & Ors.
Sanjay Dogra v. Union of India & Ors.
D. Anuradha v. Joint Secy. & Anr.
Saraswathi Seshagiri v. State of Kerala (1982) 2 SCC 310
Israil SK v. District Magistrate of West Dinajpur (1975) 3 SCC 292
Dharua Kanu v. State of W.B. (1975) 3 SCC 527
Anil Dey v. State of W.B. (1974) 4 SCC 514.
Debu Mahato v. State of W.B. (1974) 4 SCC 135
Union of India & Ors. v. Manohar Lal Narang
Abdul Sathar Ibrahim Manik v. Union of India & Ors.
Chelawat case (1990) 1 SCC 746 SCC p. 434, para 22) SCC p. 140
N. Meera Rani v. Government of T.N. (1989) 4 SCC 418
Sanjay Kumar Aggarwal v. Union of India (1990) 3 SCC 309
Kamarunnissa v. Union of India (1991) 1 SCC 128
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.