HAFIZ MOHD LIAQAT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner had prayed, inter alia, that a writ of habeas corpus be issued quashing an order dated 30th of January 1990 passed by the Administrator of Union Territory of Delhi under Section 3(1) read with Section 2(f) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods and also preventing him from engaging in transporting, concealing and keeping smuggled goods.

(2.) In pursuance of the impugned detention order, the petitioner was arrested on 8th of February 1990. Since-then, he is in detention. In the grounds of detention, it was alleged that the petitioner arrived at Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, on 14th of May 1989 from Dubai by Emirates Flight No. EK - 700. Contraband: gold in different size of cut pieces of 24 carats purity, collectively weighing 603 gms., was recovered from his baggage and the same was seized by the Customs Officer. The petitioner was supplied the grounds of detention along with a list of 24 documents relied upon together with the order of detention. Since the petitioner understands only Hindi language, copies of Hindi translation of the grounds of detention as well as of most of the documents relied upon were given to him. But, translated copies of two of the documents, now in question, namely, items 23 and 24 of the List, were not supplied.

(3.) Earlier, the petitioner had filed a writ petition, registered as Cr1. Writ No. 148/90 challenging his detention only on two grounds. First, that the nexus between the object of passing the detention order and the prejudicial activity of the petitioner stood snapped because of lapse of time between the petitioners landing on 14th of May 1989 and the passing of the detention order, on 14th jf January 1990. Secondly, that one of the document steeled upon by the Detaining Authority did not bear any date or signatures on it which showed non-application of mind by the Detaining Authority. The challenge on both these points was rejected and that writ petition was dismissed by P.K. Bahri, J. by a judgment dated 19th of July 1990.