NARESH GOYAL Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs :

(2.) It is pertinent to note that the aforesaid petition has been placed before us as per the Roster, only in view of prayer clause (a) i.e. writ of habeas corpus. If prayer clause (a) which is the principal prayer, cannot be entertained, as being not maintainable in the facts, the question of entertaining rest of the prayers, would not arise. Hence, we proceed to consider whether the aforesaid petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus would be maintainable in the facts.

(3.) Although, learned senior counsel Mr. Amit Desai raised several grounds i.e. physical copy of the grounds of arrest not being served on the petitioner, illegality of the arrest order, passing of mechanical remand orders without application of mind and the petitioner not being produced before the competent Court within 24 hours of arrest, as statutorily mandated, we had at the very outset, made it clear to the parties, that we would first decide whether the petition filed by way of a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable / not, in the facts of the present case, and if maintainable, then proceed to decide the other prayers.