JASBIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition challenging the detention of the petitioner under the provisions of conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short "COFEPOSA ACT"). The detention order came to be passed and the challenge thereto has been made in the following circumstances:

(2.) On the night intervening 9th and 10th of December,1993, the petitioner alongwith his other Bhupinderjit Singh Ghuman,arrived at I.G.I. Airport,. New Delhi for boarding Malaysian Airlines flight No.MH-191. After immigration clearance, the petitioner reported at the customs counter of the IGI Airport. He was asked by the Customs Officers whether he was carrying any unauthorised foreign currency or any other contraband goods in his baggage or on his person. But, the petitioner denied carrying any of them. The baggage of the petitioner was then subjected to search as a result whereof travellers cheques amounting to US dollars 9500 were recovered. Out of these travellers cheques 5000 US dollars issued in his name were returned to him and travellers cheques worth 4500 US dollars issued in the name .of one Sunder Lal bearing the signatures for full encashment were seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act as the petitioner was not able to offer any evidence for their lawful exportation. Consequent to the seizure, a Panchanama was prepared on the spot on December 10,1993. The air ticket of the petitioner for Delhi Kulalampur Singapore - Calcutta -Delhi Sector and boarding card were also taken into possession by the customs officer alongwith his passport. The brother of the petitioner who was to travel alongwith him was also intercepted. He voluntarily ejected two bundles of foreign currencies from his rectum in the departure hall toilet, in the presence of two witnesses. These bundles contained foreign currencies equivalent to Rs.5,34,290.00 . The statements of the petitioner and his brother were re corded under Section 108 of the Customs Act in which the recovery and seizure was admitted in the manner stated above. Bhupinder Jit Singh also confessed that the currency recovered from him was given to him by the petitioner. The petitioner endorsed the statement of his brother that the recovered currency was given to the latter by him. Besides, the petitioner stated that the currency was handed over to him by one Jagtar .Singh of Patiala and was to be delivered to one Niranjan Singh. The petitioner also admitted having an account with OCB bank, Singapore, in which he had a credit balance of 65,026.87 Singapore dollars. He even confessed having two other accounts in Hongkong Bank jointly with his mother for which no permission of the Reserve Bank of India was taken. In connection with these offences, the petitioner and his brother were arrested under Section 104(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the same day and produced before the duty Magistrate, who remanded them to judicial custody which was subsequently extended till January 7,1994. The petitioner in order to secure his release, filed a bail application on December 14, 1993 in which it was stated that he was falsely implicated, that nothing incriminating was recovered from him and that he had made the statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act under coercion, threat and duress. The bail application, however, was rejected by the ACMM on December 24, 1993. Thereafter the petitioner moved another bail application on January 5, 1994 before the ACMM Delhi which also came to be rejected on January 7,1994. The petitioner filed yet another application for bail on January 19,1994 which resulted in grant of an interim bail for a period of one month by the ACMM vide his order dated January 22, 1994. The petitioner then moved a fourth bail application on February 11, 1994 which was granted by the ACCM on March 11, 1994 subject to the petitioner furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rupees one lac with one surety in the like amount.

(3.) On March 25, 1994, the Deputy Secretary to the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Home Department) acting on behalf of the Lt. Governor of National Capital Territory of Delhi passed an order of detention against the petitioner which was served on him on the same day while he was still in custody as by that time he had not fulfilled the conditions of bail. Thereafter on March 30,1994 the grounds of detention were also served on the petitioner. On April 11, 1994 the petitioner made a representation (Annexure D to the petition) to the first respondent, the Lt.Governor of Delhi,seeking revocation of detention order passsed against him on the ground that the grounds of detention were served on him on the 6th day of the service of the detention order i.e. beyond the statutory period of five days as provided by Section 3(3) of the COFEPOSA Act rendering the detention illegal and violative of Article 22 (5) of the Constitution and Section 3(3) of the COFEPOSA ACT This representation was rejected by the detaining authority on April 22, 1994. Thereafter the petitioner submitted an independent and separate representation to the Advisory Board dated May 6,1994 which was followed by another representation dated May 10,1994. Both the representations again raised a question of interpretation of Section 3(3) of the COFEPOSA Act. These representations were ultimately rejected by the Delhi Administration and the detention was confirmed on June 1, 1994 by the order of the Lt. Governor. National Capital, Territory of Delhi