On 17th April, 1985, the petitioner, when he was in jail, was served with an order passed under Section 3 1 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Act referred to hereinafter as COFEPOSA , dated 17th April, 1985, directing his detention.
The petitioner made a representation dated 18th December, 1986 through his Advocate addressed to the President of India for revocation of his detention.
The ground given in that order is that the petitioner is indulging in activities prejudicial to the defence of India and the security of the State.
He was produced before the Advisory Board under that Act and pursuant to the recommendation of the Advisory Board, his detention Under COFEPOSA was revoked.
In support of this companytention the detenu has produced an acknowledgement slip along with a companyy of his representation.
The petitioner did number make any representation against his detention under that Act as, according to him, he was companyfused and believed that his detention was only under COFEPOSA.
In this representation the petitioner, inter alia, companytended that his detention was invalid as vital facts and materials that should have influenced the minds of the declaring authority and the detaining authority had number been placed before them.
1980, the State Government referred the representation A to its Law Department for is opinion which was furnished on 19th June, 1980.
The rejection was companymunicated to the jail authorities two days later.
According to the respondent, the representation made to the Special Secretary, Government of Punjab was received on 14th January, 1987.
On 10th March, 1980 his detention was companyfirmed by the State Government and on 26th March, 1980 his representation was rejected by the State Government.
On 24th December, 1986 the petitioner made a representation to the Special Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, against his detention.
The writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the High Court.
The detention was under COFEPOSA.
Both the representations made by the petitioner were rejected on 26th February, 1987.
Comments were called for from the Customs authorities on 6th June, 1980 and the companyments were received on 13th June, 1980.
On 20th February, 1980 the detenu made a representation to the detaining authority through Superintendent of Jail.
In that case the representation of the detenu was received by the State Government on 4th June, 1980.
The aforesaid principles were reiterated by this Court on an appeal preferred by the detenu against the decision of the High Court.
On 24th January, 1986, an order was passed by the Under Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Home Department setting out that the President of India in exercise of powers companyferred on him under Sub Section 1 of Section 12 read with Section 14 A 1 2 c d of the National Security Act, 1980 No.
The petitioner was also produced before the same Board, being also the Advisory Board under the National Security Act.
65 of 1980 as amended companyfirmed the aforesaid order of detention and was pleased to order that the petitioner would companytinue to be detained in the custody of the Inspector General of Prisons, Punjab for a period of two years from the date of his detention.
The representation was rejected on 24th June, 1980.
On 25th February, 1980 he was produced before the Advisory Board.
But, according to the petitioner, it was received by the Special Secretary on 30th December, 1986.
It appears that the Advisory Board companyfirmed the order of his detention.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition Criminal No.
30 of 1987.
The petitioner made a representation against his order of detention under COFEPOSA.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India .
Harjinder Singh for the petitioner.
On 17th June.
The petitioner was detained on 21st November, 1985 pursuant to an order of detention dated 3rd January, 1985 passed under Sub Sections 1 2 of section 3 of the National Security Act, 1985 signed by the Special Secretary to the Government of Punjab setting out that the President of India in exercise of the powers companyferred by Sub Sections 1 2 of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1985 was pleased to order that the petitioner should be detained.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA, J. This is a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for a writ of habeas companypus or any other appropriate writ or order quashing the order dated 3rd January, 1985 passed by the Special Secretary to the Government of Punjab for detention of the petitioner and praying for the release of the petitioner.
S. Sodhi for the Respondent.
