SAKINA ABBASBHAI VASI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the wife of detune Abbasbhai Heptullabhai Vasi (hereinafter referred to as "the detune") who was detained by an order dated October 14, 1988 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, with a view to preventing him from abelling the smuggling of goods under sub -section (1) of Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974.

(2.) THE grounds on which the detention order was based were that on July 9,1988 the officers of Intelligence Unit, Sahar Airport, Bombay intercepted two passengers by name Iqbal Yakubbhai Richdiwal and Fakruddin Mohamed Ali Lakdawala and during their search it was revealed that they were found in possession of foreign currency equivalent to Indian Rupees 4,33,800/ - and Indian currency worth Rs.5,23,500/ - in the baggage of Richdiwala and the customs officers, therefore, seized the said currency under a reasonable belief that the same were attempted to be smuggled out of India. These currencies were seized under a panchanma dated July 9, 1988. What was alleged against the detune was that he arrived from Dubai on 1 -7 -1988 and before departure to Bombay his brother by name Kaizer Vasi told him to arrange ticket of F.M. Lakadwala and he accordingly booked ticket for Lakadwala and another for Iqbal Richdiwala for their departure to Dubai on 9 -7 -1988. Further, he received phone call from Dubai on his residential telephone No. 339708 from one Soyab Dholakwala having an electric shop in Dubai and that Dholakwala told him that one person would meet him in Bombay and the said contract person would give him some bundle of foreign currency and that the said foreign currency was to be carried out of India. It was also alleged that the said contract person told him that the said foreign currency was to be sent to Dholakwala and he told one person by name Haider to conceal the said foreign currency in one pillow case and that he went to the business -premises of Lakadwala and handed over the said pillow (in which he had concealed the currency) to Richdiwala on his way to Anookool Hotel and that he had arranged air tickets for Iqbal Richdiwala and Fakruddin Lakdawala and that he had not promised any monetary consideration either to Iqbalbhai or Lakadawala for carrying the foreign currency to Dubai and further that he was to get monetary consideration of Rs. 5,000/ - after successful delivery of foreign currency to his brother Kaizer Ali in Dubai through Iqbal Richdiwala and that his brother Kaizer Ali was to give the said foreign 'Currency to Dholakwala.

(3.) THE petitioner who, as stated above, is the wife of the detune challenges the detention order on the ground that the detaining authority has, inter alia, drawn a vital conclusion to the effect that although departmental proceedings and court proceedings had been initiated against the detune (despite the fact that no material to that effect was or could have been placed before the detaining authority) yet he was "satisfied" that it was necessary to detain the detune. According to the petitioner, the said conclusion was drawn on totally non -existent facts and material in that the departmental proceedings were initiated by the show cause notice issued on 9 -12 -1988 and the court proceedings were initiated by filing the complaint on 13 -12 -1990. Thus, according to the petitioner, the "satisfaction" arrived at by the detaining authority on the aforesaid crucial issue was sham and a mere pretence which displays not only the casual but rather callous exercise of the statutory power and non -application of mind and that is how the impugned order was, per se, mala fide and ab initio null and void.