VARUN GUPTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment inasmuch as they raise virtually identical issues and are also connected on the basis of facts. In W.P.(Crl) 1662/2010 filed by Varun Gupta, an additional point has been taken with regard to the detention order having been passed and sought to be executed against a wrong person. Apart from that all the other pleas, taken in the two writ petitions, are identical. For the purpose of convenience, we shall refer to the facts and circumstances in the writ petition filed by Varun Gupta. We again point out that all the issues, raised in W.P.(Crl) 1662/2010 filed by Varun Gupta, except the issue with regard to the detention order being sought to be executed against a wrong person, have been raised in the case of the Petitioner Ram Kishan Das (W.P.(Crl) 1664/2010).

(2.) The learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the impugned detention orders which are both dated 20.09.2010 are liable to be quashed even at the pre-execution stage because they fall within the five instances mentioned in Additional Secretary, Govt. of India v. Alka Subhash Gadia, 1992 Supp1 SCC 496. In the first instance, it has been submitted that the detention orders, passed under Section 3(1) of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (hereinafter referred to as "COFEPOSA Act"), are bad because the only instance referred to in the detention orders is of alleged smuggling. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, smuggling by itself, unless and until it is coupled with the element of conservation or augmentation of foreign exchange, cannot be a ground for passing a detention order under the COFEPOSA Act. Thus, according to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, the detention orders would be open to challenge even at the pre-execution stage as it fell within the first instance mentioned in Alka Subhash Gadia (supra) which is to the effect that the impugned order is not passed under the Act under which it is purported to have been passed.

(3.) The next plea taken by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner in the case of Petitioner Varun Gupta is that the detention order was passed against a wrong person. The learned Counsel referred to the detention order passed in the case of Varun Gupta which reads as under: