GEETA RANI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE wife of the detenu has filed this Habeas Corpus Petition for quashing the order of prevention dated 20. 12. 2006, which has been passed by the State of Tamil Nadu with a view to prevent the detenu from smuggling of goods in future. Such order has been passed in exercise of power conferred under Section 3 (1) (i) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (Central Act 52 of 1974), hereinafter referred to as "the COFEPOSA Act".

(2.) FROM the grounds of detention it appears that on 13. 11. 2006, the detenu after having completed check-in, immigration, customs and security formalities, was within the security lounge area of Anna International Airport, Chennai and was intercepted and questioned by the Intelligence Officer attached to Air Intelligence Unit of the Customs regarding the contents of the detenu's baggage. The detenu stated that he was carrying Rs. 4 lakhs of Indian currency. The officer took the detenu and his baggage to the Air Intelligence Unit room and the detenu was questioned in presence of two independent witnesses. The detenu replied that he was carrying Rs. 5 lakhs in hand baggage and Rs. 2 lakhs in checked-in baggage. Examination of olive green 'hush Puppies' stroller bag bearing Srilankan Airlines Baggage Tag No. UL278401 resulted in recovery of Rs. 9 lakhs of Indian currency. Examination of hand baggage consisting of one black 'blazer club' zipper bag resulted in recovery of Rs. 5,00,000/ -. It is further stated in the grounds of detention that the detenu,

(3.) ON 14. 11. 2001, the detenu was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. It was asserted in the Habeas Corpus Petition that the detenu was released on 15. 12. 2006 and he retracted his statement on 17. 12. 2006 and thereafter the order of detention was passed on 20. 12. 2006. Copy of the grounds of detention was served on 23. 12. 2006. It is stated that on 5. 2. 2007, a representation was sent on behalf of the detenu asking for certain details including the provision of law for violation of which he was detained. On 17. 2. 2007, a reply was given without giving the required details.