KADAR ISMAIL VORA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution the respective petitioners who are the detenu under the provisions of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act 1974 (COFEPOSA for short) and his son respectively have challenged the orders of detention on diverse grounds. Both the orders are of even date viz. 29-4-1985 and they are based on the very same material. The orders are also identical and as a common question of law has been raised in support of these petitions both these petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The detaining authority viz State of Gujarat on being satisfied with respect to the legacy that with a view to preventing them from dealing in smuggled goods it is necessary to so do has passed the impugned orders ic exercise of powers conferred by sec. 3(1) of the COFEPOSA. Both the detenus were supplied Gujarat translations of the detention orders and also grounds of detentions of even date along with their Gujarati translations....

(3.) Mr. Karmali learned counsel for the petitioners contended amongst others that the orders of detention are so worded that it is difficult for the detenus to visualise as to whether appropriate Government has invoked its power under sec. 3(1) being satisfied on the head of detention mentioned in sec. 3(1)(iii) or on the head of detention mentioned in sec. 3(1)(iv) of COFEPOSA. Consequently the orders of detention show total non-application of mind or vacillating state of mind of the detaining authority and have thus kept detenus guessing. That effective right of representation against the detention orders as guaranteed by Art. 22(5) of the Constitution has stood violated and on that ground these detention orders are liable to be set aside. ....................... ................................. ...............................