TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (8) TMI 714
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iaselvam under Section 3 (1) (ii) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (Central Act 52 of 1974)(hereinafter referred to as "COFEPOSA" Act). The said order of detention came to be passed with a view to preventing him from abetting the smuggling of goods in future. 2. It is seen that based on specific intelligent report, the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (D.R.I), Chennai while watching the passengers near the aerobridge of Flight A1.473, intercepted the detenu P. Mariaselvam, employed as Assistant Officer, Security, Air India, Chennai, and a search was conducted in the presence of independent witnesses. During the said search, he was found wearing a specially stitched kh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Any goods brought into India contrary to the legal provisions of Customs Act, 1962 are liable to confiscation under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962 and the persons concerned therein are liable for penal action under section 112 and punishment under section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962. The act of the detenu amounts to smuggling as per Section 2 (39) of the Customs Act. In the instant case, 150 numbers of Pentium 4 Computer Processors were brought into India by concealment in the aircraft of flight A1-473/26.11.2003 which were on prior arrangement between Murugan and the detenu. Thus, the seized Intel Pentium Processors not constituting a bona fide baggage have been brought into India in contravention of the provisions of Section 11....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpugned detention order was passed and there is no merit in this petition. 4. In order to appreciate the above contentions, it is useful to refer the relevant provisions of the Customs act, 1962 and COFEPOSA Act. Section 1 (39) of the Customs Act, 1962 defines " smuggling": "Section 1 (39) "smuggling", in relation to any goods, means any act or omission which will render such goods liable to confiscation under section 111 or section 113;" Section 111 of the Act refers to confiscation of improperly imported goods while Section 113 relates to confiscation of goods attempted to be improperly exported. Section 3(i) of the COFEPOSA Act empowers the Central Government or State Government or any officer of the State Government may if sati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; and (iii) a judgement of the Allahabad High Court in Wazir Yadav v. State of U.P (1993 Cri.L.J. 1220). Admittedly, the first two cases dealt with by the Supreme Court relate to various offences under the Indian Penal Code and not either under Customs Act or under COFEPOSA Act. It is further seen that in those cases since the principal offender was acquitted after a full-fledged trial, the Court has concluded that after acquittal of the principal offender, the abettor cannot be convicted. As said earlier, the present case is not at the trial stage and we are concerned to decide the issue whether the detenu has involved in the smuggling of goods; and whether the State Government is justified in detaining him under COFEPOSA Act with a view t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of detention of other co-detenu is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Further, the case dealt with by the Allahabad High Court pertains to an order of preventive detention passed under National Security Act and not under COFEPOSA as in the present case. Accordingly, we reject the contention raised by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner. 6. Mr. B. Kumar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner by drawing our attention to the decision of this Court in Kutbudeen Ali Bhoy v. State, reported in 1990 Law Weekly (Criminal) 169, would contend that the detaining authority failed to consider and not applied its mind to the statutory provisions and to the facts of the case properly resulting in total mis-direction in arrivin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....". Merely because the other detenu, namely, Murugan had brought the contraband and concealed the same in the toilet of the aircraft, the smuggling of goods as referred to in sub-clause (i) of the Act cannot come to an end. Likewise, on reaching the destination, somebody i.e., other than the person who brought the goods, deal with the contraband to avoid confiscation either under section 111 or under Section 113 of the Customs Act, undoubtedly, the authority empowered to make orders detaining him in prison with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the conservation or augmentation of foreign exchange or with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods, or abetting the smuggling of goods. The detenu in the case o....