Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. It is further seen that the Sessions Court cancelled the anticipatory bail vide order dated 21.04.2016 as the detenue failed to comply with the conditions of bail and did not appear before the investigating agency on almost six dates. It is also brought out in the course of investigation that the detenue was involved in foreign currency smuggling case equivalent to Rs.1,04,35,812/-, wherein two persons namely Abdul Ghani and Hameed Ulla were arrested on 09.12.2015 at KIA, Bangalore and foreign currency was seized. On interrogation, both of them admitted that the said foreign currency was in fact given to them by the detenue and the associate of the detenue, one Fazal, for further disposal at Dubai. During the course of investigation, the authorities claim that it came to light that the detenue was the master mind in the smuggling racket of foreign currency to the tune of 0.29 crores also. The further case of involvement of foreign currency smuggling in a sum of Rs.29,37,702/- registered by Bangalore Zonal Unit which was attempted to be smuggled out of the country has been also referred to. On 09.02.2016, the detenue in this case and his associate Fazal were intercepted by the officers of BRI, Bangalore and interrogated with regard to involvement in the seizure of foreign currency and the gold of foreign origin.

10. Fazlur Rahman also stated that both of them were actively involved in smuggling of gold and smuggling of foreign currency out of India and that he used to arrange carriers for smuggling of gold into India. In the further statement of the detenue recorded on 09.02.2016, he has stated among other things, that he had met Mivin through one Arun Verma working for Thai Airways at Bangalore Airport and apart from Mivin and other colleagues of Air India Sats, he used to help in clearance of smuggled gold by way of concealment and non-declaration to Customs using various modus operandi.

12. The detenue was informed of his right to make representation to the Central Government against the detention order and to the detaining authority and also to the Advisory Board and also regarding the procedure followed before the Advisory Board constituted under Section 8 of the COFEPOSA Act. In the details of documents relied upon, the detaining authority referred to totally 89 documents.

13. Main contention urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order of detention is vitiated because it states that 'to prevent the detenue from the act of smuggling foreign currency and gold', it was necessary to make the order of detention. According to the learned Counsel, as per the grounds of detention, petitioner was allegedly involved in the act of abetting smuggling of foreign currency and gold and not in actually committing the act of smuggling of foreign currency and gold, therefore, the very premise on which the detaining authority has proceeded was wholly erroneous. He also points out that the satisfaction in the grounds of detention and in the order of detention being at variance caused confusion in the mind of the detenue affecting his valuable right available to him under Article 22 of the Constitution in submitting his reply.

20. Merely because the show-cause notice referred to in the list of documents had not been considered, the same would not render the satisfaction derived by the authority vitiated as the said document was not the document on which the satisfaction was based. Further, the grounds urged in support of detention made it clear that the detenue was the kingpin along with Fazal in smuggling of gold and foreign currency. The search and seizure, in the background of the conspiracy hatched by several persons resulting in smuggling of gold into India and smuggling of currency out of India does not provide any room for the petitioner to contend that there was no material to show that the detenue had himself involved physically and personally in the act of smuggling and that order of detention under Section 3(1)(i) of the Act could not have been issued. The fact that there was vital link between the detenue and Nidheesh Tharol from whom contraband gold was recovered and with Mivin and Mufeed Majeed and others who have actively participated in the illegal activities is evident from the materials gathered during the course of investigation. It is these materials which are made basis for the detaining authority to form the subjective satisfaction.