NINA PILLAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by Mrs. Nina Pillai and her two minor sons, challenging the order dated 2-6-1995, passed under Section 5 of the Extradition Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, appointing a Metropolitan Magistrate to conduct an enquiry into the case. The order had been passed pursuant to a letter of request received from Singapore High Commission for provisional arrest for purpose of extradition of late Mr. Janardhan Mohandass Rajan Pillai (hereinafter referred to in short as Mr. Rajan Pillai). The petitioners are seeking quashing of the order dated 2-6-1995.

(2.) The petitioners in addition have sought a declaration that Section 5 of the Act to the extent it permits the issuance of an order for inquiry without complying with the principles of natural justice, is ultra vires the provisions of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Further that Sections 3,4,5,6 and 7 of the Act do not apply to the Indian citizens. In the alternative it is prayed, that if the said Sections are held to apply to Indian citizens,the same be declared unconstitutional being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 5,14,19 (1) (e) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The petitioners have impleaded besides Union of India as respondent No.1, Mr. Pranab Mukherjee, the then Minister of External Affairs as respondent No.2 and Mr. Oscar Kerkatta, Under Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs as respondent No.3. It was put to the learned counsel for the petitioner, that there was no occasion to implead the said respondent by name and in their personal capacity, specially when the only bald allegation in the petition as against the said respondents was "that the order has been passed malafide and their exist malice in fact and in law." Learned counsel thereupon fairly conceded that the said respondents may be deleted from the array of respondents. Accordingly, respondents 2 and 3 are deleted from the array of respondents. Learned counsel fairly stated that she would not press for prayer E of this writ petition regarding a declaration to entitlement of punitive damages which the petitioners reserve their right to claim separately, if so entitled at Law.