RAJINDER ARORA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition seeks quashing of Show Cause Notice dated 3-3-2005 (Annexure P-33) issued by Additional Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Ludhiana. Further prayer made is that Union of India may be directed to initiate disciplinary and departmental proceedings and prosecution against the officials including respondents No. 4 to 7 i.e. different functionaries of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, who are responsible for illegal detention of the petitioner No. 1 and pay compensation to the petitioners for wrongful detention.

(2.) It is stated that the petitioners are engaged in the business of manufacturing/export of acrylic yarn, blankets and shawls. On 26-5-2004, the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence raided the residential premises of petitioner No. 1. No incriminatory material was found. The petitioner was illegally detained for over two days and later on shown arrested under the provisions of Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short "the 1962 Act") and on medical examination, injuries were found on his person. He was, thereafter, released on bail. Bank accounts were also ordered to be seized, later on de-freezed. Petitioner No. 1 filed a criminal complaint on 18-2-2005 alleging wrongful confinement, physical torture and defamation, which is stated to be at a stage of preliminary evidence. On 31-3-2005, the order of detention under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 was passed. In the grounds, it is mentioned that the raw material imported without import duty was clandestinely diverted and for fulfilling export obligations, sub-standard material was procured and supplied. Order of detention was challenged and vide judgment dated 10-3-2006 Rajinder Arora V/s. Union of India and others, 2006 4 SCC 796, Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed the order of detention on the ground of delay in passing and executing the order. It was also noticed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that no prosecution has been initiated nor any show cause notice has been issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade and that redemption certificates indicating fulfillment of export obligations were duly issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade. It was further observed that status report was submitted by the DRI office Ludhiana on 15-2-2005 proposing that the detention order may not be passed. In para 14, it was observed: -

(3.) The petitioner claims to have received the impugned show cause notice on 15-4-2006 after the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court was passed.