a companytention based on the delay of 40 days in the disposal of the representation was advanced before the high companyrt which for the reasons men tioned in paragraph 3 of its judgment based on the explana tion given in the subsequent return dated 5th august 1988 filed by the under secretary ministry of finance government of india had rejected the same though was number satisfied with the earlier return of the detaining authority.
this explanation has been accepted by the high court.
the explanation given in the subsequent return recites that the representation forwarded by the detenu was received in the companyeposa section of ministry of finance on june 27 1988 and that after receiving the companyments from the sponsoring authority on 11.7.88 the file was forwarded to central government.
the said file was received in the office of the minister of state revenue on 12.7.88 but the minister of state was on tour and on his return the representation was forwarded to the finance minister on 17.7.88 and the file was received back in companyeposa section on 19.7.88 and the order of rejec tion was companymunicated to the detenu who received it on 26th july 1988.
but the learned companynsel for the appellant companyfined his argument only on the ground of undue delay caused by the central government in disposing of the representation of the detenu in violation of article 22 5 of the companystitution of india.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal 573 of 1988.
from the judgment and order dated 9.8.1988 of the bombay high companyrt in w.p.
sirish gupta and v.b.
meanwhile the representation forwarded to the detaining authority was rejected on 11.7.88 itself.
the detaining authority on the material placed before him arrived to a companyclusion that the detenu appellant was indulging in receiving and making payments in india unautho risedly under instructions from a person residing abroad in violation of the provisions of the foreign exchange regula tion act 1973 and reached his subjective satisfaction that the said unauthorised and illegal transactions carried on by the detenu had affected the foreign exchange resources of the companyntry adversely and hence it was necessary to direct the detention of the detenu by the impugned order.
according to the learned counsel the detenu had forwarded his representation dated 16.6.88 through the superintendent of the central prison bombay to the detaining authority and the central government and he received the order of rejection dated 19th july 1988 on 26th july 1988 i.e. after a period of 40 days from the date of making his representation.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ratnavel pandian j. this appeal by special leave under article 136 of the companystitution of india is preferred against the judgment made in criminal writ petition number 627/88 on the file of the high companyrt of judicature at bombay dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant assail ing the validity and legality of the order of detention dated 28th april 1988 passed against him by the joint secre tary ministry of finance department of revenue govern ment of india new delhi under section 3 1 of the companyserva tion of foreign exchange and prevention of smuggling activi ties act 1974 hereinafter referred as the act with a view to preventing the appellant from indulging in activi ties prejudicial to the augmentation of companyntrys foreign exchange resources.
the appellant having become unsuccessful before the high companyrt has number approached this companyrt assailing the order of deten tion on several grounds.
number 627 of 1988.
c. mahajan a. subba rao p. parmeswaran a.s.
bhasme and a.m. khanwilkar for the respondents.
joshi for the appellant.
