BHAVANI SHANKAR B PALIWAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH this petition preferred under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, the petitioner who is the brother of the detenu Ramesh B. Paliwal @ Ramesh Chandra Paliwal, seeks to challenge the detention order dated 31-5-1996 passed by the second respondent Mr. K. L. Verma, Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi, detaining the detenu under section 3 (1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 ( Hereinafter referred to as the COFEPOSA Act ). The detention order along with the grounds of detention bearing the same date was served on the detenu on 16-12-1997. In order to dispose off this petition, in our view it would not be necessary to advert to the prejudicial activities of the detenu detailed in the ground of detention.

(2.) WE have heard Mr. Maqsood Khan for the petitioner,mr. R. M. Agarwal for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Mrs V. K. Tahilramani, public Prosecutor for the respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

(3.) GROUND no. 4 (iii) has been replied to in the three returns namely these of:- (1)R. B. Dange, Inspector of police attached to P. C. B. C. I. D. Mumbai (return dated 6.3.1998 ) ; (2)Mr. Somnath Pal, Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi ( Return dated 20-3-1998 ); and (3)Mr. S. L. J. Gallyot, Assistant Director Enforcement Directorate, Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue ,mumbai. ( Return dated 6-10-1998 ) In each of these returns, a most cogent explanation for the non-execution of the detention order against the detenu has been furnished. The explanation in them is that the detention order could not be served on the detenu as he had absconded immediately after the offending seizure and only surrendered to the P. C. B. C. I. D. Mumbai on 16-12-1997 and on the said date when the detention order was served on him.