OM PRAKASH Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the detention order dated 15.6.1990 passed in the name of the Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi under Section 3(i) read with Section 2(f) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as COFEPOSA).

(2.) The petitioner was employed as Aerobridge Operator with the International Airport Authority of India at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. On 52.1990 one Ajit Singh was apprehended in the Immigration Hall and in his statement under Section 108 he stated that he was to hand over gold of about I kg. to a person in blue uniform. The petitioner who was on duty on that day was arrested by the Customs (Preventive) Officer on an allegation that he was helping Ajit Singh in smuggling gold. The petitioner in his statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act denied that he knew Ajit Singh and also denied having any connection with the smuggling of gold. The petitioner was produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and was remanded to judicial cutody and later on a bail application filed by the petitioner he was released on bail on 24.2.1990. The employer of the petitioner i.e. the International Airport Authority of India on 13.2.1990 suspended the petitioner w.e.f. 5.2.1990 on the ground that a Criminal offence was under investigation against the petitioner and that he had been detained for more than 48 hours in police custody. A show-cause notice was also issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs on 31.5.1990 to the petitioner requiring him to explain why penalty should not be imposed upon him under Section 112 of the Castoms Act. The petitioner replled to the show-cause notice on 6.8.1990. The adjudication proceedings continued and ultimately on 26.11.1990 the Deputy Collector passed an order imposing penalty of Rs. 15.000.00 against the petitioner This order dated 26.11.1990 passed by the Deputy Collector was challenged by the petitioner by way of an appeal before the Collector (Appeal) The Collector (Appeal) insisted for pre-deposit of the penalty amount and the petitioner, therefore, filed a revision petition to the Central Government praying for dispensing with the deposit of penalty amount before the consideration of the appeal on merit. The Central Government allowed this revision petition and directed the Collector (Appeal) to hear the appeal on merits.

(3.) A complaint was filed by the Collector, Customs against the petitioner under Section 135 of the Customs Act on 8.3.1990 before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and trial in that case is proceeding and evidence of the complainant is being recorded. The petitioner apprehended that he will be detained under the COFEPOSA because a Sub Inspector of Delhi Police tried to serve a copy of the detention order on him through the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. In fact, it is alleged that the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has issued Notice under Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code to the said Sub Inspector for his such conduct. It was later on confirmed in Court on 22.4.1991 that a detention order had been passed against the petitioner on 15.6 1990. The petitioner, therefore, filed this preseat writ petition on 30.4.1991.