PALLAVI VINOD PATNI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who is wife of detenu-Vinod Babubhai Patni in this writ petition is seeking to challenge the detention order bearing No. SSA 0900/i-SPI-3 (A) issued by Shri S. H. Shool, Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra. By detention order dated 13-4-2000, the Detaining Authority specially empowered under section 3 (1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short "cofeposa") issued an order for detention of Vinod Babubhai Patni after being satisfied that his detention was necessary to prevent him in future from smuggling the goods. The detention order is placed on the file of the writ petition as Annexure A and grounds in support thereof are at Exhibit B. The detention order came to be passed in the back drop of facts that on 3-7-1999, the officer attached to the Commissionarate of Customs (General) seized 150 gold bars from Sayed Karim Gaffoor. The statements under section 108 of the Customs Act were recorded including that of the detenu. During the course of enquiry, on the basis of the material collected by the concerned authorities and in the search of residential as well as office premises of the detenu, the authorities found involvement of the detenu in the crime. The detenu was also arrested on 11-10-1999 and thereafter released on bail on 4-11-1999. The detenu was issued show cause notice under section 124 of the Customs Act for the action under section 112 (a) (b) and 114 (1) of Customs Act dated 30th December, 1999 which was received by the detenu on 5-1-2000. In response thereto the detenu replied to the Commissioner of Customs on 30-3-2000 denying each and every allegation made against him in the show cause notice.

(2.) THOUGH in the writ petition various contentions have been raised, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner heavily relied upon ground No. 5 (v) which reads thus :---

(3.) THE nub of the aforesaid ground is that though the sponsoring authority placed before the detaining authority the show cause notice dated 30-12-1999 issued to the detenu for action under section 112 (a) (b) and 114 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962, the sponsoring authority did not place the reply dated 30-3-2000 submitted by the detenu and that has vitiated the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority in issuing the detention order.