2001 (12) TMI 817

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mit Bansal, Neeraj Jain, Adish C. Aggarwala and Neeraj Goyal for the Respondent. JUDGMENT 1. This judgment will govern the disposal of the three writ petitions. These writ petitions challenge the show-cause notice dated 31-10-2001, issued under section 6(1) read with section 6(2) of the Smugglers & Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 ('the SAFEMA'). By this notic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f purchase and the illegal activity of Detenu to which connected. (ii)Reason to belief dated 17-2-2000 does not generate honest and bona fide belief that the abovesaid properties are illegally acquired properties. (iii)Notice under section 6(1) dated 17-2-2000 already issued and above properties forfeited. (iv)No prima facie case for issuing forfeiture notice. (v)No nexus or connection....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er section 6(1) dated 17-2-2000 was already issued and above properties forfeited, it is open to the petitioners to show cause to the competent authority to demonstrate as to whether the notice is otiose in view of the earlier order of forfeiture dated 17-2-2000. 7. Insofar as the fourth reason is concerned that there is no prima facie case for issuance of forfeiture notice and reliance on the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lea which may be urged before the competent authority and not directly in writ jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227. 9. Insofar as the sixth reason is concerned that the direction by the Tribunal is illegal in law and challenge to the Tribunal's direction to issue a forfeiture notice under section 6(1) read with section 6(2) it is not open to the petitioners to challenge this direction becau....