9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (3) TMI 334X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it would appear that he is a professional carrier. In the instant case, he has consciously and for a fairly substantial amount agreed to act as carrier for foreign currency to take it outside. Generally speaking, the detention, process under the COFEPOSA Act would be required to have applied to such persons to prevent them from repeating their activities in future after availing of bail granted which in fact has been granted and availed of in the instant case. It is to be regretted that despite detention being eminently suitable and deserved in the instant case, we have to quash the order of detention because of the clearly casual and careless manner in which the same has been passed. 3. The detenu was leaving Bombay at the International ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Airport. The currency indicated in the grounds of detention and also in the statement of the detenu was recovered on 18th December 1987 at D.R.I. Office at Construction House, Ballard Estate. 8. In the same vein in Item No. 8 to the List of Documents/Statements accompanying the order and the grounds of detention and as stated earlier signed by the detaining authority. The said Item No. 8 is as under .- 8. Application dated 17-3-1988 25 made to the Court for disposal of seized gold." 9. We have asked the learned Public Prosecutor to show us the forwarding letter pertaining to documents Nos. 7 and 8 in the list since originally only the first six documents were forwarded. The forwarding letter has not been placed for our perusal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that when accosted by the officers at the Sahar Airport, the detenu gave his name as Iqbal Noor Mohamed and produced the passport as well as the ticket in that name. 11. This passport and the ticket have been seized by the D.R.I, authorities, but surprisingly they were not placed before the detaining authority. Equally surprising, the detaining authority did not notice the lapse and call for these two vital documents to assure himself of the correctness of what was noted in the statement of the detenu recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act. It may be mentioned that in the first panchnama it is clearly mentioned that the passport and the ticket were taken charge of by the D.R.I. officers from the detenu as the same would be relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . We have not been impressed by any of them. There is some delay both at the stage of passing the order of detention but more so before executing the same. It has been urged that between May 1988 when the order of detention was passed and September 1988 when it was implemented, the detenu got married. That does not seem to have any relevance. We are told that efforts were made during this period to serve the order of detention on the detenu. We accept the submissions for whatever they are worth making it clear that merely because of the delay we would not have been inclined to release the detenu. It has been urged that his retraction statement and the memo under which he availed of bail were required to be placed before the detaining author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
