VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common judgment two Criminal Writs No. 26/2002 'Vijay Kumar Gupta v. Union of India and Ors.' and 64/2002; 'Kishan Chand Gupta v. Union of India and Ors,' can conveniently be disposed together. As facts in both the petitions by and large are identical therefore for sake of convenience the facts are being taken from Criminal Writ No. 26/2002 'Vijay Kumar Gupta v. Union of India and Ors.'.

(2.) The petitioner has been detained vide order of 10th August, 2001 purported to have been passed by the Joint Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance in exercise of powers under Sub-section (1) Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short the Act). The petitioner assails the order of detention of multifarious grounds, namely that there is undue delay in passing of the detention order of 10th August, 2001 because it is claimed that alleged date of incident giving rise to the passing of the detention order is 6th February, 2001. There is thus a delay of more than six months in passing the detention order. There is also a delay in execution of the detention order dated 10th August, 2001 which was served on the petitioner some time on 11th September, 2001 though he was available at his address. Petitioner's claim is that there is even a delay of 11 days in dispatching the detention order and further delay of 20 days in serving the same. Another ground alleged by the petitioner is hat Detaining Authority is bound to supply the grounds of detention within five days of his detention. The petitioner was served with unsigned copies of the grounds of detention and this cannot be taken to be communicating the grounds of detention in law. The representation of the petitioner is also stated to have not been considered and documents supplied were illegible. Lastly, it has been asserted that there is suppression of relevant material from the Detaining Authority. After the alleged seizure of 6th February, 2001 the Department of Revenue Intelligence i.e. Detaining Authority had issued orders whereby import of Shivalik Impex Pvt. Ltd. as well as Shiv Ganga Organic Chemical Limited being the companies responsible for illegal import have been banned. These orders were capable to sway the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority but there has been non-application of mind in this regard. Vital facts were suppressed from the Detaining Authority.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed by respondents 1 and 2 the petition as such has been contested. It is denied that detention order is illegal, arbitrary and unwarranted. It is denied that the grounds of detention were unsigned and on that ground, grounds so conveyed are void. The petitioner had acknowledged receipt of set of grounds of detention and each page of the grounds of detention bear the dated signature of the petitioner. According to the answering respondents, these prove that the petitioner had received the signed copy at the time of service of grounds of detention. It is stated to be a plea which is an after thought and had been taken after a month of the grounds of detention having been served. Petitioner, is alleged to have made a representation dated 22nd October, 2001 though it is shown to have been typed on 20th October, 2001. The representation was rejected after careful consideration of the Detaining Authority and Secretary Revenue.