2008 (8) TMI 982

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assed by the Detaining Authority under the provisions of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The Grounds of Detention were served on the detenu. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, and perused the record. 3. The attack on the detention by the learned counsel for the petitioner is on three grounds: that there was delay in passing the Order of Detention; secondly, it was contended that there was a vital document (Nil Panchanama), which was not considered by the Detaining Authority while passing the Order of Detention; and the third ground was that it was a case of total non-application of mind by the Detaining Authority. 4....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ority that no bonded warehouse in the name of above said firms were in existence at the addresses provided. Further, photocopies of 'Rewarehousing Certificates' certifying receipt and storage of the goods imported in the names of the above said firms at the declared bonded warehouse, were sent to the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities, for verifying genuineness of the same. It was reported by the concerned Central Excise authorities that the proper officer has issued no such Certificates. The said 'Rewarehousing Certificates' were being submitted to the authorities in Bond Section of JNCH, Nhava Sheva for getting the Bonds cancelled and release of supporting Bank Guarantees, which were furnished at the time of filing ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... running into about 7419 pages. Thereafter, the concerned Assistant after carefully going through the papers, prepared a scrutiny note on 3.1.2007 and forwarded it to the Under Secretary. The Under Secretary who gave his endorsement on the same day and forwarded the same to the then Detaining Authority. The then Detaining Authority endorsed it on 17.1.2007 and thereby directed to call IO for discussion. Accordingly, the sponsoring authority was communicated on 23.1.2007. The Investigating Officer attended the office of the then Detaining Authority on 12.2.2007 and after discussion, the then detaining authority directed him to submit the report. It is submitted that accordingly the then Detaining Authority returned the file to the Desk on 13....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the same day, then it can be presumed that the Detaining Authority had 10 days with her to pass an order on 30th April, 2007. Whereas in the counter-affidavit, she stated that on 30th April, 2007, she approved the proposal and formulated the Grounds of Detention, the record shows that she made the following observation on the file: "Discuss with I.O. Issue Detention Order." That means the Detaining Authority made her mind to detain the detenu on 30th April, 2007 itself. 7. We fail to understand how the Detaining Authority had taken into consideration documents which were comprising of 7419 pages. Even if it is accepted that she had 10 days before she passed an order of directing issuance of Detention Order, although that is not proved ....