OMPRAKASH GOEL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who is the father of the detenu, has challenged an order dated 18/12/03, placed at Annexure 'A' page 1, whereby the detenu was detained in accordance with the provisions made in Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short, "COFEPOSA"). The detaining authority has recorded a finding that the detenu was required to be detained with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods in future.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the said order on several grounds. It has been contended that the documents relied upon by the detaining authority, for the purpose of deciding the issue of detention, have not been supplied to the detenu. It has also been contended that certain documents which were necessary for preparing and submitting representation to the appropriate authority in accordance with Clause 5 of Article 22 of the Constitution of India, were not provided to the detenu despite his demand. Therefore, the detenu was not able to submit effective representation to the appropriate authority. It has also been contended, apart from the merits of the case, that the detenu had undertaken not to enter into activities of export and import of goods on E.O.U. facilities and therefore also, the further detention of the detenu could be done away with.

(3.) On the aforesaid considerations, it has been contended that the order of detention is not legal and therefore, it is required to be quashed. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the order of detention may be set aside and the detenu may be ordered to be set at liberty forthwith.