JUDGMENT

A.K. Sikri, J

1. On 24th September, 2009 a search operation was launched in the residential premises of the petitioner by the officials of the Directorate of Enforcement under the supervision of its Deputy Director. During this search, Indian currency in the sum of Rs.12,50,000/- and some foreign currency was recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner was also taken to the office of Directorate of Enforcement where he was interrogated about the seized money and his statements were also recorded under Section 67 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985(hereinafter referred to as `NDPS Act') on 5th December 2009 and 6th December 2009.

2. It is the allegation of the petitioner in this writ petition that since officials of the Directorate of Enforcement could not find any incriminating material against him, they felt defeated and, therefore, started searching a trap to implicate the petitioner or to bring him within the provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as `PML Act'). The premises of the petitioner was thereafter again searched on 5th December, 2009 by the officers of the Narcotic Control Bureau of India (NCB for short) alongwith the officers of Directorate of Enforcement.

3. The petitioner was arrested on 6th December, 2009 by invoking the provisions of Section 24 and 27A of the NDPS Act. He was produced before the Duty Magistrate when the NCB officials sought custodial remand of the petitioner for three days. In the remand application, the respondent-NCB, inter alia, stated that the petitioner was involved in financing directly and indirectly to various peoples all over the world for sale, purchase, transportation of narcotic drugs, import into India, export from India or transshipment of the said narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances etc. and was in fact indulging in such activities. It was further alleged that the involvement of the petitioner in such activities was apparent from the facts disclosed by the petitioner in his statements recorded on 5th December 2009 and 6th December 2009 under Section 67 of the NDPS Act and also from the inputs provided from the enforcement agencies from abroad.

4. Though the petitioner opposed this application through his lawyer, the learned Duty Magistrate was pleased to grant three days police remand of the petitioner i.e. till 9th December, 2009. On 9th December, 2009, the petitioner was once again produced before the learned Special Judge, NDPS, New Delhi This time, the respondent moved an application seeking judicial remand of the petitioner for a period of fourteen days on the same averments which were narrated in their first application. At the same time, the petitioner also moved an application alleging that he had been falsely implicated in the case; during the police remand he was interrogated by the Directorate of Enforcement, DEA (USA) and other agencies in the office of NCB and was tortured; his signatures were forcibly obtained on blank papers; he was forced to write a statement which was dictated by NCB officials and officials of other agencies; no recovery of any drug was effected from the petitioner or money seized either. He also denied any transaction of the nature alleged by the respondents having been made by the petitioner either in India or in any other country. He reiterated his statement made before the NCB. The Petitioner was remanded to judicial custody by the learned Special Judge.

5. On the basis of search which was earlier carried out by the office of the Directorate of Enforcement on 24th September, 2009, the said Directorate also registered a case against the petitioner and arrested him on 11th December, 2009 under the provisions of Section 3 & 4 of the PML Act. By another application dated 15th December, 2009 the respondents again sought judicial remand of the petitioner for a further period of fourteen days stating therein that the investigation was likely to take so