THARMAR Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This habeas corpus petition is filed by the husband of the detenue by name Tharmar Samuthiram, a resident of Pudukkottai District. The detenue was detained under Section 3(1)(i) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (Central Act 52 of 1974) and confined in Special Prison for Women, Tiruchirapalli pursuant to the order of detention passed in G.O. No. SR.I/369-5/2011 dated 12.7.2011. The said Government Order was subsequently amended by order dated 15.7.2011 substituting the name of the Central Prison, Tiruchirapalli, to Special Prison for Women, Tiruchirapalli. The case of the petitioner is that on 25.5.2011 the detenue came from Colombo by Jet Flight No. SG 002 and arrived at Anna International Airport, Chennai. The Immigration Officers attached to the Airport Customs Department intercepted the detenue as if she brought gold and attempted to smuggle the same without making declaration. The Officers examined the detenue and recovered 1000 gms of gold and its value was assessed as Rs. 22,51,000/- . The Officers prepared a seizure mahazar. The detenu was arrested on 25.5.2011 at 5.00 p.m. for contravening the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The detenue was produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court (E.O. II) on the same day at 7.00 p.m. and she was remanded till 8.6.2011. The learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (E.O. II), Egmore, Chennai granted bail on 1.6.2011 on condition that the detenue shall appear daily before the respondent, who registered the crime and execute sureties. The detenue came out from prison on 13.6.2011. The detenue filed an application to modify/relax the bail condition on 29.6.2011 and during pendency of the said application seeking modification/relaxation of the condition, the impugned detention order was passed by the first respondent on 12.7.2011.

(2.) The detention order dated 12.7.2011 is challenged in this petition by the husband of the detenue raising several grounds such as retraction letter of the detenue dated 1.6.2011 addressed to the Commissioner of Customs (Air), Customs House, Rajaji Salai, Chennai, through the Superintendent of Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, Chennai, wherein she retracted her confession statement made before the sponsoring authority, even though was received by the jail authority viz., the 4th respondent, the same was not forwarded to the concerned authority/detaining authority. The detenue also sent a post detention representation to the detaining authority on 21.9.2011 with specific reference about the retraction letter dated 1.6.2011.

(3.) The second ground of attack is that after the detention order was passed and during the confinement of the detenue in prison, the customs authorities issued show cause notice on 11.8.2011 for which the detenue sent a reply on 15.9.2011 to the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Air), Air Cargo Complex, Meenambakkam, Chennai-27 and the same was also acknowledged by the concerned authority. The said show cause notice and the reply of the detenue were not placed before the Advisory Board/Confirming authority. The State Advisory Board meeting was held on 21.7.2011 and confirmation order was passed by the State Government on 12.10.2011. Not placing the show cause notice and reply before the State Advisory Board/Confirming Authority has vitiated the order of detention.