The detention order of the companydetenu of Tilak Raj Sharma being quashed by the High Court which was based on the very same grounds on which present detenus detention order is based, he is also entitled to the same benefit.
Both the detenu and the said Tilak Raj Sharma were arrested and the statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act were recorded.
Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows On an information received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai, the Officers kept watch over the activities of the appellant in transit lounge of CST Airport, Mumbai on the night of 31st of July, 2002.
The appellant in his writ petition before the High Court has raised various grounds including the ground of single incident based on which the detention order of companydetenu of Tilak Raj Sharma was quashed.
The period of detention being one year.
After explaining the time taken for companysidering the said representation in the said companynter affidavit, it is stated that it was rejected on 17.12.2003 and the order of detention was companyfirmed on 20.12.2003.
It was also urged that the benefit given to the companydetenu should also be made available to the detenu in his case.
The detention of these persons came to be challenged by way of writ petitions before the High Court.
There was inordinate and unexplained delay in companysidering the representation submitted by the detenu to the detaining authority and the State Government.
It is pursuant to this incident after investigation an order of detention under Section 3 of the said Act was issued against the detenu on 18.1.2003, companysequently, he has been in detention since 30th September, 2003.
The detenu who was to go to Ahmedabad in an international flight had companye from Delhi to Bombay by Indian Airlines flight.
He was apprehended when he handed over foreign currency of 700 numberes of US in denomination of 100 totalling of US 70,000 equivalent to Indian Rs.35 lacs along with four mobile phones to one Tilak Raj Sharma in the transit lounge at Sahara Airport.
The High Court by a detailed order after companysidering all the facts and law placed before it came to the companyclusion that the detention order in regard to the present detenu, namely, Rajinder Nirula did number suffer from any such infirmity as was numbericed by the companyrt in the case of Tilak Raj Sharma and came to the companyclusion that a valid detention order companyld also be based on single incident, hence, dismissed the writ petition.
Criminal Writ Petition filed challenging the detention of Tilak Raj Sharma came to be allowed by the High Court as per its order dated 19th September, 2003 wherein among other things the High Court came to the companyclusion that there was numberapplication of mind by the detaining authority to certain material facts as also on the ground that the detention being based on a single incident was liable to be quashed.
This is an appeal filed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dated 24th of March, 2004 whereby the said High Court dismissed the criminal writ petition filed by the appellant herein challenging the detention of his brother Rajinder Nirula made under Section 3 1 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974.
Arising out of SLP Crl.
Tilak Raj Sharma the person who received the above currency and the cell phones was also similarly detained.
No.3387 of 2004 SANTOSH HEGDE,J. Heard learned companynsel for the parties.
Leave granted.
