T ANANTHI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

(2.) It is contended by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that the impugned order of detention was passed on the basis of a single and solitary incident of an alleged act of smuggling of goods, which can never be a justifiable ground for invoking the harsh provisions of preventive detention law under COFEPOSA. It was further contended that it was not an organised act or manifestation of an organised activity. According to the learned senior counsel, the test in such cases is to see whether the act is such that it gives rise to an inference that the person would continue to indulge in similar prejudicial activity. The tortured, dictated, extorted and retracted statements of the accused/detenu, will never be a sufficient ground for detention under a dark law.

(3.) To analyse the above said ground, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken us through the grounds of detention to show under what circumstances the impugned order of detention was passed. On 29.1.2008, the detenu, who is holder of an Indian passport No. B 1894254 dated 11.5.2000, arrived at Chennai from Kualalumpur by Jet Airways. He was intercepted by the Customs Officer in Anna International Airport, Chennai, while he was crossing through 'Green' Channel, on a reasonable suspicion that he might be carrying some dutiable item like gold by way of concealment; when questioned, the detenu declared that he was not carrying any such item. Not satisfied with his declaration, the Officer took the detenu along with his two checked-in-baggages to the Air Intelligence Unit Room situated at the Arrival Hall of the Anna International Airport for a detailed examination. Before examination, the detenu was asked again for the declaration of goods and money, if any carried by him, in the presence of two independent witnesses, to which, he reiterated that he was not carrying any dutiable item, like gold, etc. On examination, he was found in possession of 500 Malaysian Ringits and on opening one of the checked-in-baggages, a grey and black colour "Campro" stroller suitcase, a white paper packet covered by a cellophane tape was found concealed among his personal effects and on cutting open the white paper, it was found that new gold jewellery was packed in a plastic pouch and covered with carbon paper, weighing 904 grams; thereafter, the blue colour "Polo" Zipper bag was opened a similar packet was found, and on cutting open the same, old gold jewellery weighing 270 grams were found. A personal search of the detenu was conducted in the presence of the witnesses and nothing incriminating was recovered. When the detenu was asked about the concealment of the gold jewellery, the detenu admitted the offence. Therefore, the detenu was arrested on 29.1.2008 under Section 104 of the Customs Act 1962 as there were reasons to believe that he is guilty of an offence punishable under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act 1962 for having attempted to smuggle the gold jewellery valuing Rs. 12,34,182/- by way of mis-declaration and concealment. Thereafter, he was produced before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, E.O.II, Egmore, Chennai, who remanded him to judicial custody upto 11.2.2008. Thereafter, the order of detention was passed on 12.3.2008.