LAWS(DLH)-1994-1-26

FAROOQ SHEIKH DURRANI Vs. LT GOVERNOR

Decided On January 25, 1994
FAROOQ SHEIKH DURRANI Appellant
V/S
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . Of late there has been a burgeoning growth of case law under Article 22(5) of the Constitution relating to the disposal of the representations made by detenus. However, every case being an island unto itself, the case in hand too presents its own hues.

(2.) . Let me first explore, in Andy Kaufmanish detail, the history of this case.

(3.) . The petitioner is a Pakistani national. He came to India on November 5, 1992. Six days thereafter while he was about to leave for Karachi from the Indira Gandhi International Airport he was intercepted by the Custom Officials. His search yeilded Indian Currency amounting to Rs.10,50,000.00 .This led to his arrest and the recording of his statement under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. Later, he was prosecuted and convicted under sections 132 and 135 ofthe said Act. However, what is relevant for our purposes is that on February 4, 1993 while the above-noted prosecution was still pending, the petitioner was served with an order of detention in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter called the Act). On March 26, 1993 the petitioner appeared before the Advisory Board and submitted a representation before it. By way of emphasis, it may be mentioned that it is this representation which has provided the bastion to the edfice raised by the petitioner.I will obviously be coming back to it but first let me complete the narrative. The Advisory Board was of the opinion that "there is sufficient cause for the detention of Farooq Sheikh Durrani". This was followed by the Order dated April 16, 1993 by the Lt. Governor of the National Capital Territory of Delhi confirming the detention and further directing under section 10 of the Act that the petitioner be detained for a period of one year from the date of his detention, that is, February 4, 1993. Since this order was the target of lot offire-work,let me reproduce the same. This is how it runs:-