9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India regarding threatened orders of detention under COFEPOSA. Detailed Analysis: The judgment pertains to a writ application filed against threatened orders of detention under COFEPOSA. The petitioner, a resident of Bombay, was involved in an incident where a dark brown substance purported to be hashish was seized by Officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence in connection with exportation to London. The petitioner, along with others, was produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Bombay and was subsequently granted bail with certain conditions. Subsequently, a show cause notice was served on the petitioner under the Customs Act, 1962, and an order of detention under COFEPOSA was issued by the Government of Maharashtra. The Court noted that the cause of action had arisen outside its jurisdiction, citing the decision in the case of Kalyan Kumar Thavarchand Shah, and concluded that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the application under Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the writ application was dismissed, and any interim orders were dissolved. The Court emphasized that the facts of the case did not warrant interference under Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner's plea for stay of the order was considered, and a partial stay was granted only until a specified date, after which the respondents were permitted to take further legal steps. The judgment highlights the importance of jurisdictional limitations and the need for legal matters to be adjudicated within the appropriate jurisdiction. The decision underscores the significance of adhering to legal principles and precedents in determining the scope of the Court's jurisdiction in matters related to detention orders under COFEPOSA.
|
