DINABANDHU MONDAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Officer -in -charge of Police Station, Habra, had definite information that some contraband articles were being carried in an Ambassador Car No WBJ 8475 from Hakimpur (a place in India on Indo - Bangladesh border) to Calcutta. Immediately, thereafter, he along with two sub -inspectors and other officers kept a watch on the Baanipur -Asrafabad Road. At about 13.15 hours on February 27, 1986, the police officers noticed the said car coming from the direction of Hakimpur. The officer - in -charge signaled to the said car to stop. The driver tried to speed away the vehicle with the passengers but it was intercepted immediately by the police vehicle. At that time, there were four occupants in the car No WBJ 8475, namely, S/Shri Dinabandhu Mondal, Prosenjit Mondal, Monoranjan Ghosh and Bholanath Karmakar, the driver. The search of the vehicle resulted in the recovery of primary gold of foreign origin with number 9999, in 19 pieces of 10 tolas each and one piece of 10 tolas with number 9990 kept concealed in a black coloured bag made of cotton and placed in the specially designed cavity on the body of the said car below the dashboard. A personal search of the occupants was also taken and articles besides currency notes of various denominations were taken into possession. In the meantime, the Customs Officers reached there and the Officer -in - charge, Habra Police Station, handed over twenty pieces of gold biscuits along with other recovered articles to them. In turn, the Customs Officers of the preventive unit seized the Ambassador car under Sec. 110 of the Customs Act, and on reasonable belief that the twenty pieces of primary gold and two wrist watches, all of foreign origin, were illicitly imported into India took them into possession. All the four occupants of the car were arrested then and there.

(2.) In his statement under Sec. 108 of the Customs Act, Shri Dinabandhu Mondal claimed the ownership of all the twenty pieces of gold biscuits of foreign origin and, inter alia, stated that he had started smuggling foreign gold since December, 1985, and from then he had brought at least 107 pieces of gold biscuits. On February 26, 1986, a man, namely, Fazlul Haque, came to him and handed over 20 pieces of gold biscuits and the petitioners in turn gave him Rs 1,00,000 in Indian currency. Then the 20 pieces of gold biscuits were kept in the secret cavity of his father's car No WBJ 8475. On March 27, 1986, he, along with his younger brother, Prosenjit Mondal left his place, Hakimpur, and at that time he did not know anything about the gold. On the way, Shri Monoranjan Ghosh, a person known to him before boarded the said car. Further, on the way, at Khaspur, his driver, Shri Bholanath Karmaker, boarded the car and started driving. However, at Baanipur Chowmatha, a signal was given by the police officers to stop. He, however, directed the driver to speed away but the car was later on intercepted and the search yielded in the recovery of the gold. He further stated that he smuggled those 20 pieces of gold biscuits of foreign origin from Bangladesh and, Therefore, could not produce any lucid document. The other occupants almost narrated the same sequence which resulted in the recovery of the 20 pieces of gold, but they denied their involvement in the smuggling. In the course of the follow -up action, the residential premises of the accused persons were immediately searched but neither any valuable documents nor any incriminating material came to their possession.

(3.) On the basis of the facts and material which came to light, Shri M L Wadhawan, Additional Secretary to the Government of India, had no hesitation in holding that Shri Dinabandhu Mondal, the present petitioner, has been smuggling goods and engaging in transporting and concealing smuggled goods. Even though adjudication and prosecution proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962 are likely to be initiated, he is satisfied that the petitioner should be detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods and engaging himself in transporting and concealing smuggled goods. The said order was passed on June 24, 1986. This very order of detention which was served on the petitioner on October 22, 1986, is under challenge in the present writ petition. His prayer is for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under article 226 of the Constitution of India, to quash the detention, set aside the impugned order of detention and order his release forthwith.