ABDUL NASIR KHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Shri Karmali, learned Counsel for the -petitioner detenu and Shri Habibuddin Ahamad, learned Counsel for the State and perused the record with their assistance. We do not see any substance in this second challenge to the order of 'detention' and 'continued detention' dated April 26, 1990 under Section 3(1) read with Section 9(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, (the Act) for the reasons that follow:

(2.) THE detailed backdrop against which the impugned order was made is set out in the order passed by a Division Bench at Bombay in Abdul Nasir Khan v. L. Hmingliana (1990) Cr.W.P. No. 537 of 1990 while disposing of the first challenge. Hence we are refraining from repeating the same over again here. After hearing exhaustive submission of Shri Ram Jethmalani, then learned Counsel for the petitioner, the said petition came to be dismissed. In this second round of challenge four grounds not urged before are raised by Shri Karmali, learned Counsel for the petitioner;

(3.) GROUND No. (i)