ABDULA MAMAD MITHANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions arise out of the filed of contraband goods from a mechanised vessel Umed-Pasa MNV 120 which was intercepted on 10/02/1985 near Piroton Island off the coast of Jamnagar. The vessel was tindelled by Daud Mamad Mithani and had as many as fifteen crew men on board at the time of its interception The registered owner of the vessel was one Aminabibi the maternal aunt of the tindel Daud. The said vessel left Dubai with a cargo of wet dates on 5/02/1985 which it was expected to unload at Jamnagar. The officers of the Customs Department received intelligence reports on 9/02/1985 that the said vessel tindelled by Daud was carrying contraband gold and other articles in secret cavities specially prepared for that purpose and was likely to touch either Jamnagar or Porbandar port for shedding the same. On receipt of this information field formations were alerted to intensify sea patrolling and to intercept the vessel. Al-Rafiqui the departmental vessel was specially moved from Mandvi on the evening of 9/02/1985 with instructions to trace and intercept Umed Pasa and escort it to Mandvi. The said vessel Umed Pasa was sighted on the morning of 10/02/1985 at about 5.00 A.M. near Piroton Island off the coast of Jamnagar. It was immediately intercepted and the officers of the Customs Department inquired of the tindel if the said vessel was carrying contraband goods. The tindel Daud declared that he was not carrying contraband goods in the said vessel whereupon it was escorted to Mandvi. It was noticed that it was loaded with wet dates. On rumma ging the said vessel on 10/02/1985 1253 wrist watches and 294 watch straps valued at Rs. 2 79 260 were recovered from a specially built secret cavity outside the forepeak of the vessel. On further rummaging other contraband goods such as television sets VCR cassettes fabrics and ladies Umbrellas all of the aggregate value of Rs. 1 18 163 were found from the said vessel. During rummaging of the said vessel the Customs Officers observed that there were secret cavities therein specially prepared for smuggling contraband goods. After the aforesaid contraband goods were found the tindel of the vessel admitted in the presence of the panchas that he had brought gold in the said secret cavities but had jettisoned the same sighting the customs launch Al-Rafiqui. The officers of the Customs Department however had a lurking suspicion that the vessel carried gold and therefore kept it under guard. The contraband goods which were found on the rummaging of the vessel on 10/02/1985 were seized under a panchnama under the reasonable belief that they were liable to confiscation under the Customs Act 1962

(2.) Since the officers of the customs department suspected that gold was carried in the said vessel it was further rummaged on 20/02/1985 on which date 21 gold lagadies each weighing 10 tolas and one half lagady weighing approximately 57.850 grams of the total value of Rs. 4 94 400 was recovered from below the engine foundation of the vessel. On the next day 21/02/1985 10 more lagadies each weighing 10 tolas valued at Rs. 2 30 300 were recovered. The aforesaid gold lagadies of foreign origin of the total value of Rs. 7 24 0 seized under the reasonable belief that they were smuggled into India and were liable to confiscation under the Customs Act 1962 A seizure panchnama was prepared in respect thereof.

(3.) In the course of investigation the statement of the tindel Daud Mamad Mithani was recorded on 12/02/1985. On the same day statements of certain crew men were also recorded. From their evidence and the find of contraband gold and other articles from Umed Pasa it became evident that the tindel of the vessel had received the contraband goods from one Haji Sattar for delivery to one Jumma at Bombay. On the basis of this material placed before the State Government the latter passed orders of detention against the detenus concerned in these petitioners under sub-sec. (1) of sec. 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act 1974 (hereinafter called the Act). The grounds of detention of even date were supplied to the detenus after their actual detention. These grounds of detention are identical to all the detenus. Subsequently the Additional Secretary to the Government of India made a declaration under sec. 9(1) of the Act on his being satisfied that the detenus were likely to smuggle goods into Bombay and the coast of Gujarat areas highly vulnerable to smuggling. In view of the declaration so made the cases of the detenus were placed before the Advisory Board after the expiry of the normal period of five weeks but before the expiry of the enlarged period of 4 months and 2 weeks. The Advisory Board constituted under sec. 8 of the Act opined that there was and is sufficient cause for the detention of each detenu. On the basis of the opinion of the Advisory Board the State Government confirmed the detention of each detenu.