UOI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With a view to prevent respondent No. 2 from indulging in smuggling activities, Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance passed an order of preventive detention on 4th October, 2010 against the respondent No. 2, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). Respondent challenged the order dated 4th October, 2010 by filing Writ Petition in this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 has filed a Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which is since pending along with bunch of similar writ petitions. An application for staying the detention order was filed in the said Writ Petition, however, it is admitted that no stay has been granted by the Supreme Court. Respondent No. 2 has successfully evaded the execution of detention order. Accordingly, petitioner has filed a report under Section 7(1) (a) of the COFEPOSA Act before the Metropolitan Magistrate for initiating the proceedings under Sections 82/83/84. of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) against the respondent No. 2. Instead of proceeding with the said proceedings, Trial Court has adjourned the matter awaiting the outcome of Writ Petition. Similar question arose before a Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition (Crl.) 933/2012 tilted Union of India versus State & Another wherein it has been held thus:-

(2.) In this case also, Hon'ble Supreme Court has not stayed the proceedings, therefore, Trial Court was not justified in keeping the proceedings under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C. in abeyance. Accordingly, petition is allowed and impugned order is set aside. Trial Court shall proceed, in accordance with law, on the prayer of petitioner declaring the respondent No. 2 as proclaimed offender.