9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (12) TMI 817X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. JUDGMENT 1. This judgment will govern the disposal of the three writ petitions. These writ petitions challenge the show-cause notice dated 31-10-2001, issued under section 6(1) read with section 6(2) of the Smugglers Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 ( the SAFEMA ). By this notice, the competent authority under section 15 of the Act has issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. ( ii )Reason to belief dated 17-2-2000 does not generate honest and bona fide belief that the abovesaid properties are illegally acquired properties. ( iii )Notice under section 6(1) dated 17-2-2000 already issued and above properties forfeited. ( iv )No prima facie case for issuing forfeiture notice. ( v )No nexus or connection with detenu s illegal activity. ( vi )Directions by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sued and above properties forfeited, it is open to the petitioners to show cause to the competent authority to demonstrate as to whether the notice is otiose in view of the earlier order of forfeiture dated 17-2-2000. 7. Insofar as the fourth reason is concerned that there is no prima facie case for issuance of forfeiture notice and reliance on the nine judges judgment in Attorney Genera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpetent authority and not directly in writ jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227. 9. Insofar as the sixth reason is concerned that the direction by the Tribunal is illegal in law and challenge to the Tribunal s direction to issue a forfeiture notice under section 6(1) read with section 6(2) it is not open to the petitioners to challenge this direction because the petitioners have in fact rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
