AVTAR SINGH ALIAS LATI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY order dated 8th November, 1989 made in exercise of powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Excharge and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short the Act) the petitioner has been ordered to be detained with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the augmentation of foreign exchange. The material facts in brief as emerging from grounds of detention, are these.

(2.) ON 16th October, 1989 the petitioner was intercepted by the officers of Enforcement Directorate and US Dollars 4250 were recovered from his possession. In the statement of the petitioner, he inter-alia stated that he was a partner in Milan Lodge and that he had purchased US Dollars 4250 at the rate of Rs. 20/- per Dollar from various foreign tourists and had to sell the said Dollars at the rate of Rs. 20.10 per Dollar to some Polish National and further that the petitioner was in the business of purchase and sale of US Dollars and other foreign exchange for the past three months during that period he had purchased and sold about US Dollars 30,000/- and earned a profit of Rs. 3,000/-. Searches were conducted at petitioner's residential and business premises under Section 37 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 on 16th October, 1989 itself which resulted in seizure of some documents from both the premises as per details in the Panchnama. The petitioner was arrested under Section 35 of FERA on 16th October, 1989 and his remand was extended on the dates mentioned in the grounds of detention. The bail application of the petitioner was dismissed but another bail application was posted for orders on 10th November, 1989 and according to detaining authority the possibility of petitioner being enlarged on bail could not be ruled out. The detaining authority on the basis of facts and material stated in the grounds arrived at the conclusion that the petitioner has been indulging in unauthorised sale and purchase of foreign exchange and violation of the provisions of FERA and the unauthorised transactions have affected the foreign exchange resources of the country adversely. The detaining authority directed that it is necessary to detain the petitioner under the Act with a view to preventing him from indulging in activities prejudicial to the augmentation of country's foreign exchange resources. The petitioner was detained on 8th November, 1989 while he was in judicial custody in connection with the criminal case.

(3.) ONE of the contentions put forth in support of the petition is that as there has been inordinate delay in consideration of the interim representation and supply of all the documents, the constitutional right of the petitioner under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of making expeditious representation to the detaining authority and the Central Govt. has been violated. Another contention is that supply of copies of search warrants on 17th January, 1990 after the meetings of Advisory Board of 9th January, 1990 and 15th January, 1990 is violative of petitioner's right to make effective representation before the Advisory Board.