FATIMA MOHAMMAD AMIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The son of the appellant herein, namely, Syed Murtuza Hussain babamiya was convicted on 30-9-1968 in a customs case for smuggling of gold and was sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rs. 1000. 00 or in default thereof three months' rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) On 18-2-1975 and 4-3-1976, two sons of the appellant, namely, Syed murtuza Hussain Babamiya and Syed Arif Babamiya were detained under the detention orders issued by the authorities under the provisions of the conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as "the COFEPOSA Act"). A show-cause notice was issued on 29-10-1976, inter alia, as to why forfeiture of one-tenth property of the appellant shall not be effected. On 29-4-1980, the respondent authorities recorded additional reasons for forfeiture of the said property by including the ground as such that the appellant being a related person, comes within the scope of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (in short "safema") and the property held by her, namely, one-tenth share in Syed Villa as well as the property in Rose Villa was liable to be confiscated.

(3.) On the basis of the additional reasons recorded, another show-cause notice was issued on 5-5-1980 pertaining to the property known as Rose villa, by which the property was sought to be confiscated.