9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Challenge to detention order u/s 3(1) of COFEPOSA Act based on subjective satisfaction and consideration of passport custody.
The judgment by the Bombay High Court pertained to a writ petition challenging a detention order u/s 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act, aimed at preventing the detenue from smuggling goods in the future. The detaining authority's subjective satisfaction was questioned, as it was based on a solitary instance and did not consider the fact that the detenue's passport was already in custody, hindering any future smuggling activities. The petitioner relied on the precedent set by the Apex Court in Gimik Piotr's case to support their arguments. The Court noted that the detention order was solely based on the subjective satisfaction regarding future smuggling activities u/s 3(1)(i) of the Act. The detaining authority did not consider other grounds for issuing the detention order. The petitioner's argument, supported by the Apex Court's decision in Gimik Piotr's case, was found to be valid, emphasizing that the detaining authority's satisfaction was flawed due to overlooking the passport custody situation. The Court allowed the petition, emphasizing that the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction was not adequately reasoned and did not consider all relevant factors. The reliance on the detenue's statements and the passport custody alone was insufficient to justify the detention order. The judgment highlighted the importance of proper consideration of all grounds before issuing a detention order u/s 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act.
|
