T MUKESH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these petitioners are efore this Court seeking for a writ in the nature of habeas corpus or any other appropriate declaring that the detention of sri Bheemappa Thyagarajan, Mr. Venkoba rao, Sri G. Raghu Gowda, Sri Anothony dominik, by order dated 28-1-2006 is illegal and void ab initio.

(2.) DETENTION order dated. 28-1-2006 was issued by Sri Sudhakar Rao, Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, who was specially empowered under Sec. 3 (1) of the COFEPOSA Act detaining the aforementioned detenus with a view to preventing them from acting in any manner prejudicial to the conservation of foreign exchange and with a view to preventing them from smuggling goods. The detenus were taken in detention. On 30-6-2006 a notification dated 28-1-2006 was issued to the detenus containing the grounds of detention along with the order of detention. List of documents and copies thereof were also served. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioners are before this Court. 2a. Notice was issued and respondents have entered appearance. Statement of objections is filed by the State. State would say that on the basis of subjective satisfaction, the detaining authority has passed the order of detention with a view to prevent the detenus from acting in any manner prejudicial to the conservation of foreign exchange and smuggling of goods. The detenus were caught while they were smuggling foreign currency out of India. Foreign currency is the one which requires preservation from loss, which means conservation. The word 'augment' connotes to increase or intensify as in size or degree of effect. While one preserves, other intensifies and therefore the object of the conservation and preservation is the same despite the fact that the two expressions are not exactly the same. Theyjustify their action by saying that the detention was necessitated in terms of the Act for conserving foreign exchange. They deny the writ averments made in the case on hand. 2b. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) SRI Kiran S. Javali, learned counsel would take us through the proceedings to contend that Annexure-A suffers from legal errors. He would say that the principal secretary has to satisfy with regard to the necessity of detention in terms of the Sec. 3 of the Act. He Would specifically say that all the detenus are detained on the ground of conservation of foreign exchange and with a view to preventing them from smuggling of goods. He would also refer to us the grounds of detention in support of his submission.