T M MAMMOO HAJI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the validity of the detention order dated 20th of August, 1987 passed by the Government of Kerala under Section 3 (l)(iii) and 3 (1) (iv) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The order was passed with a view to preventing the petitioner in dealing with the smuggled gold otherwise than by engaging in transporting or concealing or keeping smuggled gold.

(2.) The brief facts arc that on 7th of November, 1986, the customs people made a recovery of Rs, 91,000.00 from the residence of one K. Sasidharan. Thereafter on 8th of November,S1986 residential premises of one M. Appukkuttan was searched and 100 gold biscuits were recovered from a china clay hidden under-neath the earth in the Kitchen. Another 100 gold biscuits of foreign made similarly hidden in china clay were recovered after 50 digging earth of the back-side of his house. On 14th of November, 1986 a tin containing 72 gold biscuits of foreign made was also seized after digging out the earth of the premises of the aforesaid person. On 24th of November, 1986 one foreign made gold biscuit was dug out. M Appukkuttan then gave a statement that these gold biscuits were delivered to him by his friend Sasidharan and that these belong to the detenu-petitioner. On 9th of Novem- ber, 1986 Sasidharan in his statement also implicated the petitioner as being the owner of the smuggled gold. The detenu who was examined on 19th of February, 1987 disowned the gold biscuits and stated that he has nothing to do with these biscuits. He was, however, arrested on the same day. The petitioner-detenu thereafter moved an application for bail on 27th of February, 1987 before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Ernakulam. He was granted bail on 6th of March, 1988 and 7 conditions were attached to it.

(3.) One of the conditions of the bail is that he shall stay in his house at Kasargoda and shall not change his place of residence without the permission of the Superintendent, Special Customs Preventive unit, Kasargoda. Together with this he was also directed not to leave the limits of Kasargoda municipality without the permission of the above-mentioned Superintendent except for the purpose of attending the court. I am making a mention of these facts as, in my view, they assume importance in the light of the point on which this petition is to be allowed.