SAKATTAR SINGH Vs. SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is presently confined in Central Jail, Patiala, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing Detention Order No. 1/90-93-3HIII (COFEPOSA)/1347 dated 5.11.1993 (Annexure P-1), Grounds of Detention dated 5.11.1993 (Annexure P-1/A) and confirmation order dated 22.2.1994 (Annexure P-2) passed by respondent No. 1 against the petitioner.

(2.) IN brief, the facts are that on the basis of specific information recorded by the Officers of the Customs Department that one Ranjit Singh Rana son of Veer Singh, resident of village Naushehra, District Amritsar, had in his possession or control one hundred gold biscuits bearing foreign markings, surveillance was kept on him. On 17.3.1993, in the evening, when he was about to enter his farm-house, he was apprehended and escorted to Custom House, Amritsar. On persistent enquiry, he admitted that he had transported one hundred gold biscuits from Pathankot which have been concealed by him, and are in the house of the petitioner since 28.2.1993. Therefore, the officers of the Customs Department kept surveillance at the house of the petitioner, namely House No. 9, Vikas Colony, Amritsar, and ultimately, on 18.3.1993, after obtaining search warrant, carried out search in the house of the petitioner in the presence of two independent witnesses and recovered one hundred gold biscuit kept in two gray cotton bandoliers from the back-rest of the bed of the petitioner. In this case, petitioner was arrested under Section 104(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, (in short, 1962 Act). The petitioner was granted bail by this Court on 26.7.1993. Petitioner was detained on 17.11.1993 and was served with detention order dated 5.11.1993, which is as follows :-

(3.) IN response to notice of the petition, reply has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 by Ms. Amrita Atwal, Deputy Secretary Home, Punjab, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, Chandigarh, in which it has been stated but detention order against the petitioner is not liable to be quashed on the grounds on the basis of which it is being sought to be quashed. In reply to ground No. 5, respondent No. 1 has admitted that the detention order was passed on 17.11.1993 and confirmation order was issued on 22.2.1994. However, it has further been stated that "in view of section 8(f) of the COFEPOSA Act where the Advisory Board has reported that there is, in its opinion, sufficient cause for the detention of the person, the appropriate Government may confirm the detention order and continue the detention of the person concerned for such period as it thinks fit. Therefore, the interpretation of said section as given by the petitioner is wrong and not admitted. In fact there in no limitation prescribed during which the detention period is to be fixed after confirmation of the detention."