RAMESH KUMAR WADHERA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by Ramesh Kumar Wadhera under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 402 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order of detention dated 22nd April, 1993 passed under Section 3 (1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (as amended) with a view to prevent him from engaging in keeping smuggled goods and dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than be engaging or transporting or concealing smuggled goods in future.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case as gathered from the record of detention Annexure P-5 are that on 19th April, 1993 the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit, searched the premises of M/s Chopra Associates, situated at No. CW-602, Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar, New Delhi, in the presence of the petitioner and recovered goods of foreign origin such as telephone, tinning, chemical, torches Micro-floppy discs etc. of the value of more than Rs. 37 lacs. The petitioner failed to produce any document to prove the legal import of the goods the same were seized in the presence of independent witnesses under a Panchnama. On the same day another godown situated at No. CW 580, Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar, New Delhi was searched on the disclosure of the petitioner from where 13824 torches of Chinese origin were recovered. From another premises 166 bales of polyester texturised yarn of foreign origin was also recovered. In his statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 the petitioner stated that he was the sole owner of the firm known as M/s Chopra Associates and he had purchased the premises where the firm was running business from a person named Bansi Lal of Delhi whose exact address he did not know by paying him Rs. 50,000/- in cash as advance. He further stated that he was owner of another shop situated at No. CW 580 in Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar, Delhi which he purchased from Sushil Chopra of Delhi whose address he did not know by paying Rs. 50,000/- in cash as advance. He further admitted that all the goods seized were received by him from Nepal and as per arrangements made the same were stored in the godown on the night of 18.4.1993. The goods were received from Sita Ram Kothari and his son Pardeep Kothari of Kathmandu and he used to finance the smuggling of goods into India from Nepal and earned 18 per cent commission on the goods so smuggled. Statements of Jasbir Singh, Bir Singh and some other persons were recorded. The petitioner was produced before A.C.M.M. Patiala House, New Delhi on 20th April, 1993 and was remanded to judicial custody. He retracted his confessional statement in the Court but after going through the facts and circumstances of the case the detaining authority, on the material placed before him, drew his requisite subjective satisfaction and passed the impugned order on 22nd April, 1993. The detaining authority also observed that although the petitioner was in judicial custody and he had not moved any bail application so far, but nothing prevented him to move bail application and possibility of his being released on bail could not be ruled out. So the detention order was passed and was served on the petitioner on the same day while he was in judicial custody.

(3.) THE various grounds assailing the validity of the impugned order were mentioned in para No. 18 of the petition, but in the return filed by the respondents the averments made in the petition were not specifically denied. Only this fact was alleged that there was proper application of mind in passing the detention order by the detaining authority and in the light of the facts of the case and the petitioner's involvement in smuggling of contraband goods valued at Rs. 57,43,050/- his detention under COFEPOSA 1974 was fully justified and well within the ambit of law.