MANSUKH CHHAGAN LAL BHATT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule D.B.

(2.) This writ petition is now coming back before us after the Full Bench rendered its opinion on October 20,1994. In the Full Bench, we decided a point which was common to this writ petition and certain other petitions. We may briefly refer to what we decided in the Full Bench case. We there held mainly that neither the delay in the issuance of a detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Act (hereinafter called COFEPOSA) nor the delay in execution of the detention order, fall within any of the five exceptions referred to in Alka Subhash Gadia ((J.T. 1991 (1) S.C. 549). These exceptions relate to contingencies in which a person could challenge his proposed detention, at the pre- detention stage. In the Full Bench case, we also referred to the rulings of the Supreme Court, namely Bapna (1992 (3) S.C.C. 512), Shamsudeen (1992 (3) S.C.C. 523), Prem Singh (1994 (2) SCALE 747) and Subhash Muljimal Gandhi (1994 (5) }.T. 358). We further held that the above categories o) delays concerning the detention order did not also come within the "same species" rule enunicated in Subhash Muljimal Gandhi's case. We overruled the decision of the Division Bench, of this Court in Subhash Chander vs. Union of India and others (1991 (43) D.L.T. 517) and other rulings taking the same view. We approved certain other rulings of this Court in so far as they were consistent with the view expressed by the Full Bench.

(3.) Now, we shall consider two other important points additionally arising in this case. Before we do so, we shall briefly refer to the facts of the case.