TMI Blog2000 (3) TMI 1070X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elay in disposing of the representation made by the detenu to the Central Government is not valid in the circumstances of this case. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. It is needless to say that the parole benefit which petitioner is enjoying by virtue of the order passed by this Court will stand terminated forthwith. - W.P.(CRL.) 227 OF 1999 - - - Dated:- 7-3-2000 - THOMAS K.T. AND SHAH, M.B., JJ. ORDER 1. This Writ Petition is filed by a detenu challenging the order of detention passed against him on 2.8.99 under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (hereinafter referred to as 'COFEPOSA'). The detention actually commenced on 4.8.99 and it is for a period of one year. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessity to preventively detain the petitioner. 5. For elaborating the first ground learned Counsel contended that records connected with the detention of the co-traveler -Radhakrishnan Prabhakaran were not placed before the detaining authority. Had those records been placed, perhaps, the detaining authority would have come to a different conclusion, contended learned Counsel. 6. We cannot appreciate the said contention for two reasons. First is that the detention order in respect of the present petitioner should be based principally on the facts centerd on what he had done in collaboration with his co-traveler. In other words, if the detention order and the connected records relating to the co-traveler were to be placed before the det ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Union of India submitted after verifying the documents that there is some lapse in the Department for mentioning the exact date on which the representation had reached the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi. Normally, a seal would be affixed showing the date on which the representation was received in the Department, but such a seal is not seen affixed on the particular representation. Of course, that does not mean that the representation had not reached the Department at all at any time. It is a certainty that it would have reached the Department on a day prior to 9.9.99. Learned senior counsel pointed out that as 3rd, 4th and 5th of September, 1999 were Government holidays the representation would have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tively detained there was no need to detain the petitioner separately as he who had only accompanied him. On the other hand, Shri V.R. Reddy, learned senior counsel arguing for the State of Tamil Nadu pointed out the broad features surrounding the catch made at the Airport on 25.4.99. This was not the only occasion when petitioner travelled to Singapore and surrounding places. On a previous occasion also the petitioner had gone up to those places. It is pertinent to point out that on the previous occasion also the petitioner had gone to some places with the same co-traveler. On the second occasion when he came back with all the contraband articles it is for the detaining authority to subjectively satisfy whether this petitioner has acquired ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
