TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (9) TMI 386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....writ petition filed by the appellant herein challenging the detention of his brother Rajinder Nirula made under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange under Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. 4. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows : On an information received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai, the Officers kept watch over the activities of the appellant in transit lounge of CST Airport, Mumbai on the night of 31st of July, 2002. The detenu who was to go to Ahmedabad in an international flight had come from Delhi to Bombay by Indian Airlines flight. He was apprehended when he handed over foreign currency of 700 notes of US $ in denomination of 100 totalling of US $ ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailed order after considering all the facts and law placed before it came to the conclusion that the detention order in regard to the present detenu, namely, Rajinder Nirula did not suffer from any such infirmity as was noticed by the court in the case of Tilak Raj Sharma and came to the conclusion that a valid detention order could also be based on single incident, hence, dismissed the writ petition. 7. In this appeal, Ms. Sangeeta Bhyana, learned counsel appearing for the appellant urged three points for our consideration. They are:- (i)The order of detention being based on a single incident, the same was liable to be quashed as the said incident alone could not have been the basis for an opinion being formed by the detaining authority ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reaching justifiable satisfaction that the person was engaged in smuggling and that with a view to prevent further smuggling, it was necessary to detain him. 10. We will now consider the facts of this case to find out whether a single incident in this case would be sufficient to detain the appellant, keeping in mind the principle of law enunciated by this Court in the above referred case. 11. The fact that the detenu was arrested at the Airport while he was handing over foreign currency totalling of US $ 70,000 with four mobile phones to the co-detenu Tilak Raj Sharma is not denied. The explanation of the detenu is that he had brought the same when he came into India from abroad and had declared the same to the Custom Authorities as requi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... This detenu had taken 16 such flights during a short period of time and it is during one or such flights he was arrested, as stated above. Thus on the facts and circumstances of this case, we are in agreement with the finding of the High Court that the material placed before the detaining authority coupled with the fact of arrest and seizure of the foreign currency which is handed over by the detenu to Tilak Raj Sharma are sufficient to form a reasonable conclusion that the detenu is likely to indulge in similar activities in future also. Therefore, we find no merit in this argument. 12. Coming to the second contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the co-detenu having been released, benefit of the said order should also ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his Court in the case of Pushpadevi M. Jatia v. M.L. Wadhawan, Additional Secretary, Government of India [1987] 3 SCC 367 wherein this Court ignored similar minor error found in the detention order. 13. Coming to the last contention of the learned counsel for the appellant pertaining to the delay in consideration of his representation, we notice that this is not a ground which was taken before the High Court. Be that as it may, the same is raised in this appeal in the following manner: "Because the High Court has erred in having failed to appreciate that it was incumbent upon the detaining authority and the State Government to satisfy the Hon'ble Court as to whether the representation submitted by the detenue to the Advisory Board at the ....