TSERING DOLKAR Vs. ADMINISTRATOR UNION TERRITORY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under Art. 32 of the Constitution the wife of the detenu Wang Chuk assails the order of his detention under S. 3(l) read with S. 2(f) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the "COFEPOSA Act") made on July 21, 1986 by the Administrator of the Union Territory of Delhi. The detenu is of Ladakhi origin and has been residing at Delhi for some time. The grounds served on him along with the order of detention stated that on March 18, 1986, the Customs Authorities on the basis of previous information in their possession intercepted the vehicle in which the detenu was travelling and inquired of him if he was in possession of contraband or smuggled gold. He answered in the affirmative and disclosed that he was carrying smuggled gold packed in a piece of cloth. At the Customs House where he was taken, 36 pieces of gold with foreign markings valued at a little more than three lakhs and seventy-three thousand rupees (Rs. 3,73,000/-) were recovered from the cloth pack. When the detenu failed to produce authority in support of the possession of it, the same were seized under the Customs Act as also the Gold Control Act. As a follow-up action, the residential premises of the detenu were searched and from there 11 pieces of gold with foreign markings, 65 cut pieces of gold of foreign origin, fifteen thousand U.S. Dollars and Indian currency of Rupees five lakhs sixty-two thousand and two hundred (Rs. 5,62,200) were recovered. The detenu failed to produce relevant papers though he claimed these articles. They too were seized.

(2.) The detenu admitted the recovery but maintained that one Puchung, owner of Hotel Kanchan in Nepal owned these articles and the detenu held them for him on the understanding that as and when Puchung asked for the whole or any part of them, the same would be delivered to him. Puchung had been visiting the detenu's house now and then for the said purpose. The detenu was arrested but was enlarged on bail. The detaining authority relying upon the materials available in the proceedings before the Customs Authorities made the order of detention. Along with the order of detention the grounds in support thereof were supplied to the detenu. Copies of 17 documents as indicated in Annexure 'C' were also supplied to him.

(3.) The detenu made a representation against the detention and the Advisory Board afforded a personal hearing to him on the 7th and the 9th of October, 1986. His detention has been confirmed.