9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (4) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s found concealed in the VCR. He made a statement admitting that he was smuggling gold. He was arrested and investigation commenced. 3.On May 13, 1992 the Magistrate took cognizance of an offence under, Section 135 of the Customs Act. It appears that the actual hearing of the case commenced on July 3, 1992 and charges were framed on August 11, 1992. It is at that stage, the impugned order of detention was made on August 18, 1992. The order states that with a view to prevent the petitioner from engaging himself in smuggling activities, it is necessary to detain him. The grounds of detention served upon him mention the number of visits he made to India during the year 1991 (as many as eight) and during the year 1992 (two) and his local con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nciple relied upon by the learned counsel, is stated in the following words: (SCC pp. 138-39) The decisions of this Court to which our attention was drawn by the learned counsel for the petitioners Jay down in no uncertain terms that detention orders can validly be passed against detenus who are in jail, provided the officer passing the order is alive to the fact of the detenus being in custody and there is material on record to justify his conclusion that they would indulge in similar activity if set at liberty. We will now consider the case-law in brief. In Vijay Narain Singh vs. State of Bihar, (1984) 3 SCC 14 :1984 SCC (Cri) 361' this Court stated that the law of preventive detention being a drastic and hard law must be strictly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, emphasised that before passing a detention order in respect of the person who is in jail the concerned authority must satisfy himself and that satisfaction must be reached on the basis of cogent material that there is a real possibility of the detenu being released on bail and further if released on bail the material on record reveals that he will indulge in prejudicial activity if not detained. (emphasis supplied) 5. To the same effect is the other decision. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Solicitor- General appearing for the State submitted that the authority did not sit over the proposal after receiving it but was actively pursuing the matter, collecting material and was following the criminal case against the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ory of Delhi is satisfied that unless prevented you will continue to engage yourself in prejudicial activities once you are released. 8.The above statement merely speaks of a possibility of the detenu's release in case he moves a bail petition. It neither says that such release was likely or that it was imminent. Evidently, the statement falls short of the requirement enunciated by this Court in Kamarunnissal. Even in the return filed in this petition, the authority has not stated (in response to Ground 'B' of the writ petition) that there was material before him upon which he was satisfied that the petitioner was likely to be released or that such release was imminent. In Ground 'B' of the writ petition, the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
