R RAMAKRISHNAN Vs. APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these writ petitions the interpretation and the application of the provisions of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act 1976 (SAFEMA; the Act) and the effect of the orders passed under the Act are in question. The writ petitioners are the relatives of the detenue/convict and the challenge is to the orders of forfeiture passed under SAFEMA in respect of properties standing in the name of the petitioners.

(2.) I have elaborately heard the submission of the learned Senior counsel Mr.B.Kumar for the petitioner in W.P.No.7609 of 2001, Mr.Rahul Balaji, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.26466 of 2001, Mr.Hajamoideen Gisti learned Senior Standing counsel for the Respondents and Mr.M.L.Ramesh, learned Senior Standing counsel for the Respondents.

(3.) BEFORE I proceed to examine the facts in each of the writ petitions and the validity of the orders passed by the competent authority under the Act which were confirmed by the revisional authority, it would be necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of SAFEMA. Safema was enacted to provide for the forfeiture of illegally acquired properties of smugglers and foreign exchange manipulators and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. In the statement of objects and reasons of the Act it has been stated that in many cases persons engaged in smuggling activities and foreign exchange manipulation have been holding properties acquired through ill -gotten wealth in the name of their relatives, associates and confidants and as these activities posed a serious threat to economy and as one of the steps taken by the Government for cleansing the social fabric and resuscitating the national economy it became necessary to assume powers to deprive such persons of their illegally acquired properties so as to effectively prevent the smuggling and other clandestine operations. For the purpose of the present cases the following provisions of the Act would be relevant. 2 -A. Act not to apply to certain persons."On and from the commencement of the provisions of Chapter VA of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), the provisions of this Act shall not apply to persons in relation to whom any order, or proceeding, may be made or taken under that Chapter] 3. Definitions."(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,"