9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 1213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Adv. And Mr. P. K. Manohar, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv., Mr. T. C. Sharma, Adv., Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Adv., Ms. Sunita Rani Singh, Adv. And Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv. ORDER CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 947 OF 2005 Few facts which need to be taken note of for the purposes of deciding this appeal are recapitulated below. On 11.04.2000, there was a search conducted o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'COFEPOSA Act') for detention of the husband of the appellant/ detenue herein. As mentioned above, as on that date, the husband of the appellant was in jail and he had not filed any application for bail. The detention order was executed on 29.10.2003 by serving the same upon the husband of the appellant in jail. His ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondents/ detaining authority about him indulging in any activity as alleged in the detention order and thus, there was no occasion to pass any preventive detention order in respect of the husband of the appellant who was already in jail. He has referred to various judgments in support of the aforesaid plea. For our purposes, it would be sufficient to rely upon the judgment of this Court in 'R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... logically that if no bail application is pending, then there is no likelihood of the person in custody being released on bail, and hence the detention order will be illegal. However, there can be an exception to this rule, that is, where a co-accused whose case stands on the same footing had been granted bail. In such cases, the detaining authority can reasonably conclude that there is likelihood ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
