KUNIL HANIFA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the detention order dated 27.9.1995 under COFEPOSA detaining the petitioner has been questioned. Petitioner was detained on 7.11.1995. Apart from the affidavits already filed, written submissions for the respondents was filed on 30.9.1996 in reply to the submissions filed by the petitioner. Petitioner's name is Kunil Mohd Hanifa.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the department received informmation that one P.K.Soopy Abdullah of M/s Mughal Travel Service,Bombay was engaged in illegal business of sale and purchase of foreign currency on a large scale. During the course of the search on 5.4.1995 at its premises, a large amount of foreign currency and documents were recovered. Six persons, including the petitioner entered premises of M/s Mughal Travel Service and they too were searched. According to the detaining authority, highly incriminating documents and personal diary along with foreign currency of UAE Dirham 50 were recovered from the detenu at the said premises of M/s Mughal Travel Service. The entries in the documents recovered from the petitioner and co-accused Sri P.K. Soopy Abdullah, revealed that the detenu was involved in FERA violations to the tune of Rs. 23,69,888.00 during the period of one week, between 25.3.1995 to 30.3.1995 - prior to the date of search. On 6.4.1995, petitioner is said to have given a voluntary statement admitting the recovery of currency and the diaries and other papers. It is stated that the petitioner also wrote the accounts from the diary so recovered. In the bail application dated 10.4.1995, the petitioner retracted. Bail was rejected. Later bail was granted on 17.4.1995 at Bombay.

(3.) The petitioner states he submitted a representation on 15.12.1995 to the detaining authority. This was rejected on 27.12.1995. Petitioner made representation to the Central Government on 4.12.1995. The same was rejected on 3.1.1996. Petitioner claims to have made another representation to the Advisory Board on 2.12.1995. A meeting of the Board was held on 5.1.1996. Petitioner claims to have made a second representation to the Board on 5.1.1996. Confirmation order was passed on 22.1.1996 for 1 year from 6.11.1995.