PAWAN MAHESH VRAJLAL SHAH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition has been filed by the son of the detenu, who has been detained under the provisions of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'COFEPOSA'), by an Order of Detention dated 23rd August, 2006. This order has been executed on 18th August, 2006, and the detenu is in custody.

(2.) COUNTER-affidavits have been filed on behalf of the Detaining Authority and the Sponsoring Authority. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, and perused the records.

(3.) COMING to the first ground, we have seen from the affidavit of the Sponsoring Authority that the respondents knew about the alleged prejudicial activities of the detenu right from the beginning, and, in fact, even in the Grounds of Detention, it has been the incident of 14th October, 2004, leading to search and seizure, which has been referred to. The Sponsoring Authority, in his counter-affidavit, has stated that the detenu, during the investigation, was absconding, and in spite of several summonses having been issued on the detenu on various dates, including 4th October, 2004, which is the date when the raid was conducted, the detenu did not appear before them. It is submitted in the affidavit that from 14th October, 2004, 7 notices were issued to the detenu to appear till 1st March, 2006, but he did not appear. Since the Department had already evidence with it, which suggested prejudicial activities of the detenu, and he was not even appearing to get his statement recorded under the provisions of the Customs Act, there was all the more necessity to proceed immediately for the Department, and the detenu's detention was necessary.