YOGESH DAULAT RAI MEHTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this petition, got listed for the first time on 1st February, 2008, is to the order dated 3rd February, 1997 of the detention of the Petitioner under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA). The petition has been filed after eleven years of the order. It is the case in the petition itself that the Petitioner had earlier preferred a petition challenging the same order of detention in this court being Criminal Writ Petition No. 566/1997 which came up for hearing on 18th July, 2002 when the following order was made.

(2.) The petition further states that in view of the detention order under COFEPOSA having been passed, show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner by the Competent Authority under Section 6 (1) of Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (SAFEMA) covering the Petitioner under Section 2 (2) (b) of SAFEMA. From the record we find that the said show cause notices under SAFEMA were issued to the Petitioner on 25th April, 1997 and 27th February, 1998 and the Petitioner had been appearing before the office of the Competent Authority, SAFEMA in pursuance to the said show cause notices from 9th July, 1999 onwards. We further find from the record that it was inter alia the case of the Petitioner before the Competent Authority, SAFEMA that since the detention order on the basis of which proceedings under SAFEMA had been initiated, was under challenge in Criminal Writ Petition No. 566/1997, the proceedings under SAFEMA may be kept pending. We find from the order dated 22nd October, 2007 of the Competent Authority, SAFEMA that the Petitioner appeared before the Competent Authority, SAFEMA inter alia on 11th August, 2003 and 5th September, 2003. The Competent Authority has in the order dated 22nd October, 2007 noted that in spite of the order dated 18th July, 2002 of dismissal of the writ petition as withdrawn, the Petitioner did not hesitate to give a wrong picture about the status of the writ petition and somehow managed to keep the proceedings before the Competent Authority, SAFEMA pending till 2007.

(3.) The Competent Authority, SAFEMA as aforesaid, ultimately, vide order dated 22nd October, 2007 declared the properties to have been illegally acquired in terms of Section 3(1)(c) of SAFEMA and ordered the forfeiture of the properties. The Petitioner claims to have preferred an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property.