RAMLA HARIS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the wife of Poozhikkal Haris, detenu No. 1388, detained in the Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram pursuant to an order passed under S.3(1)(i) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, hereinafter referred to as "the Act".

(2.) Facts which led to the detention are as follows: On 7th December 1994, the Customs Intelligence Officer attached to Air Customs, Calicut Airport detained a passenger by name Mujeeb Rahman, who was waiting for security check for travelling to Sharjah. On examining his body, foreign currency of various denominations, including U.S. Dollars, Oman Riyals, Saudi Riyals, Kuwaiti Dinars, U.A.E. Derhams, Qatar Riyals and Baharin Dinars, valued at 1 -2 crores of Indian Rupees were recovered from him. Mujeeb Rahman gave a statement under" S.108 of the Customs Act. According to him, one Saide of Kacheripady had arranged for a Visa for him to proceed to Sharjah on condition that he should carry foreign currencies. Sri Mujeeb Rahman was arrested and subsequently released on bail. The Customs authorities questioned various people including the detenu. When he was questioned under S.108 of the Customs Act on 22nd January 1995, he stated that at the instance of Saide he volunteered to smuggle foreign currencies out of India for remuneration of Rs. 10,000 and air-tickets. After staying at Sharjah for about nine days, he returned on 16th July 1994. After further investigation into the facts stated by the detenu, Customs Authorities placed the records before the detaining authority for issuing order of detention under the COFEPOSA Act. On 17th May 1995, Exhibit P1 order of detention was issued under S.3(1)(i) of the COFEPOSA Act. In execution of that order, detenu was taken into custody on 2nd June 1995. Grounds of detention and connected documents were served on the detenu on 3rd June 1995. He did not make any representation against the detention. Detaining authority referred the case relating to the detenu to the Advisory Board on 29th June 1995. On 2nd August 1995, Advisory Board gave its opinion justifying the detention. On the basis of that opinion, Exhibit P-3 order of confirmation under S.8(f) of the COFEPOSA Act was issued on 10th August 1985. On 23rd August 1995, detenu filed representations to all authorities. By Exhibit P-5 order dated 29th August 1995, the detaining authority rejected the representation. The Central Government, by Exhibit P-6 order dated 21st September 1995, rejected the same. Hence this Original Petition.

(3.) Learned counsel representing the petitioner, wife of the detenu, raised four points for our consideration (1) There was inordinate delay in issuing Exhibit P1 order of detention. On account of the delay, the nexus between the act of smuggling and the object sought to be achieved by detention has been snapped; (2) Central Government, did not dispose of the representation within a reasonable time and it has vitiated the order of detention; (3) Relevant documents were suppressed, by the sponsoring authority, from the detaining authority and consequently the detention is vitiated; and (4) Exhibit P-3 order of confirmation passed under S.8(f) of the COFEPOSA Act did not make mention of the period to which the detenu was to be detained. The said order only mentioned "one" without stating whether it is a day, a month or an year. Consequently, the order is vitiated. We shall proceed to deal with these submissions in seriatim.