WMP(MD)No.5459 of 2021

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved on : 01.04.2021

Pronounced on : 26.04.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

WP(MD)Nos.3917 & 3918 of 2020

and

WMP(MD)No.5459 of 2021

in

WP(MD)No.3917 of 2020

Mohammed Haroon

... Petitioner in WP(MD)No.3917 of 2020

Shaik Mohammed

... Petitioner in WP(MD)No.3918 of 2020

Vs.

1.The Additional Director General,

Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,

No.27, G.N.Chetty Road,

T.Nagar, Chennai – 600017.

2.The Senior Intelligence Officer,

Trichy Regional Unit,

Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,

No.1, Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy.

3.The Regional Passport Officer,

Royala Towers No.2 and 3, IV Floor,

Old No.785, New No.158, Anna Salai,

Chennai.

4.The Airport Authority of India,

Tiruchirappalli Airport, Trichy.

5.The Joint/Additional Commissioner of Customs,

Office of the Commissioner of Customs,

No.1, Williams Road, Cantonment,

Trichy.

(R3 in both the writ petitions are impleaded vide court order

dated 10.02.2021 in WMP(MD)No.14388 & 14065 of 2020)

(R4 in both the writ petitions are impleaded vide court order

dated 24.02.2021 in WMP(MD)No.2888 & 2897 of 2021)

(R5 in both the writ petitions are su motu impleaded vide court

order dated 10.03.2021)

Common Prayer: Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the

respondents herein to allow re-export of the goods viz., gold

1/9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

WMP(MD)No.5459 of 2021

ornaments weighing 200 grams and electronic goods as requested by

the petitioners vide letter dated 03.02.2020 to the first

respondent and to hand over the passport, impounded/detained by

the second respondent to the petitioners.

(prayer was amended vide court order dated 17.12.2020

in WMP(MD)Nos.14392 & 14070 of 2020)

in both cases :

For Petitioners

: Mr.Zahir Hussain

For Respondents

: Mr.R.Aravindan, CGSC for R1 & R2

Ms.Victoria Gowri,

Assistant Solicitor General for R3

Mr.S.Bageerathan for R4

COMMON ORDER

While reading the great Indian epics, namely, the Ramayana and

the Mahabharatha, we feel that some of the principal characters

have been less than fair while dealing with their antagonists.

Was Lord Rama justified in shooting the fatal arrow at Vali by

hiding behind a tree ?. Karna is another unforgettable character.

The wheel of his chariot was stuck in the mud and when he was

attempting to retrieve it, Arjuna's arrows struck him. What about

Abhimanyu?. Though the Sastras spoke of rules of war (Yudha

Dharma), the approach was often that all is fair in love and

war. Attainment of victory was more important than observing the

niceties of the game.

2.But, a constitutionally governed democratic State which is

committed to upholding the rule of law shall not adopt unfair

methods when prosecuting citizens and non-citizens alike. And if

the executive wing does, judiciary shall not wink. I must, with a

sense of moral unease, acknowledge that there exists an

exception to this lofty principle. An illegally procured evidence

may still be admissible provided it is relevant. Just as an

accused in a criminal case is entitled to fair trial, a noticee is

entitled to fair adjudication and enquiry. This is implicit in

Article 14 as well as Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It

can be taken as axiomatic and an uncontestable proposition. What

are the contours of this right ?. While it is not necessary to

exhaustively delineate its scope, there can be no doubt that the

noticee is entitled to copies of documents in official custody if

they have a bearing on the defence. Denial of access to such

documents may result in prejudice to the noticee in properly

defending his or her case.

3.The question that arises for consideration in these writ

petitions is whether this right to