TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 657X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the illegally acquired money of the detenu(s). As the condition precedent for initiation of the proceeding under SAFEMA did not exist, the impugned orders of forfeiture cannot be sustained. In that view of the matter, the appeals deserves to be allowed. - C.A. 7400 OF 1996 - - - Dated:- 16-1-2003 - KHARE, V.N. (CJI), SINHA, S.B. AND LAKSHMANAN A.C., JJ. ORDER 1. The son of the appellant herein, namely, Syed Murtuza Hussain Babamiya was convicted on 30th September, 1968 in a Customs case for smuggling of gold and was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000 or in default thereof three months rigorous imprisonment. 2. On 18th February, 1975 and 4th March, 1976, two sons of the appellant, namely, Sye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er challenge on the ground that the detention order passed against her son had been set aside by the High Court, However, the appellate authority remanded the matter to the competent authority for further investigation in the matter. On 18th December, 1981 the competent authority recorded fresh reasons under Section 6 of of the SAFEMA. On 24th October, 1986 an order was again passed directing forfeiture of the Rose Villa property. Aggrieved thereby the appellant preferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the Competent Authority. The said order was challenged by means of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but the same was dismissed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y but only to reach the properties of the convict/detenu or properties traceable to him, wherever they are, ignoring all the transactions with respect to those properties. By way of illustration, take a case where a convict/detenu purchase a property in the name of his relative or associate--it does not matter whether he intends such a person to be a mere name-lender or whether he really intends that such person shall be the real owner and/or possessor thereof--or gifts away or otherwise transfers his properties in favour of any of his relatives or associates, or purports to sell them to any of his relatives or associates--in all such cases, all the said transactions will be ignored and the properties forfeited unless the convict/detenu or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng link between those properties and the convict/detenu, the burden of disproving which, as mentioned above, is upon the relative/associate. In this view of the matter, the apprehension and contention of the petitioners in this behalf must be held to be based upon a mistaken premise. The bringing in of the relatives and associates or of the persons mentioned in Clause (e) of Section 2(2) is thus neither discriminatory nor incompetent apart from the protection of Article 31-B." 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the reasons recorded by the Competent Authority alongwith the show cause notice. We do not find any averments to the effect that the property acquired by the appellant is a benami property of her son ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
