VERONICA CAITANINHO D SOUZA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the detention order of Caitaninho DSouza @ Caitain son of Jacinto Tome DSouza dated May 25, 1985, issued by the 3rd respondent, the Administrator of Goa, Daman & Diu, and the subsequent declaration dated August 8, 1985, issued by the 2nd respondent, the Addl. Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi, under the provisions of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter for short referred to as the Act). The petition has been filed by Smt. Veronica Caitaninho DSouza, the wife of the detenu. The 3rd respondent passed the order dated May 25, 1985 under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Act on being satisfied that it was necessary to detain the petitioner with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods. The grounds of detention were formulated and are dated May 25, 1985. The grounds of detention together with the relevant material on which the grounds are based were served on the detenu on July 14, 1985, along with the order of detention. Thereafter, on August 9, 1985, the 2nd respondent issued a declaration under sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Act as amended by the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities (Amendment) Act, 1984. The declaration was served on the detenu on August 17, 1985. The present petition is filed on September 16, 1985, challenging both the order of detention and declaration under section 9(1).

(2.) The grounds of detention disclose that on the night of November 30, 1984, an incident of seizure of contraband goods consisting of textiles and spares of watches in 85 packets valued by the customs authorities at Rs. 21,10,638.00 m.v. The landing of the goods and the consequent seizure thereof took place at Betalbatim. The police authorities who conducted the seizure under a panchanama handed over the goods to the customs authorities. During the course of the investigation, the customs authorities recorded the statements of various persons including that of the detenu. On the material placed before it, the detaining authority reached the conclusion that the detenu along with another was responsible for the clandestine landing of the contraband goods in question on that night at Betalbatim. Para-6 of the grounds mentions that the detenu along with others was responsible for the clandestine landing of the said contraband goods on that night at Betalbatim. Para-27 of the grounds mentions that on the basis of the material placed before it, the detaining authority was satisfied that the detenu was engaged in smuggling of goods valued at several lakhs of rupees into the country.

(3.) In support of the challenge to the impugned orders of detention and the subsequent declaration under section 9(1) Mr. Karmali urged before us the following contentions :