further on this occasion the advocate was told that the detenu will be produced before the magistrate at 5.30 p.m. on that very day and therefore she waited in the magistrates companyrt upto 5.30 p.m. to obtain bail for the detenu but as the detenu was number produced the magistrate declined to pass any order on the bail application.
chandwani in his statement before the customs officers stated that the two bags which he was carrying on his person belonged to the detenu who was dealing in silver and gold in udaipur and that he was merely a carrier who used to receive remuneration of rs.
the detenu also stated that this had been going on for about six to eight months and that he had made five to six trips in a month and on each such trip he used to carry 2 1/2 to 3 kgs.
of gold.
29 5 78 of the gujarat high companyrt in spl.
it appears that when the interrogation of the detenu was going on while he was in custody of the customs officials smt.
the high companyrt however rejected the said contention as also the other companytentions urged on behalf of the appellant the wife of the detenu and dismissed the said application on may 29 1978.
he further stated that after disposal of the gold belonging to prem at ahmedabad he used to carry the sale proceeds to prem and account for the same at the time of the next transaction between him and prem.
on december 22 1977 while he was in judicial custody the detenu was interrogated by customs officers and his statement was recorded on that day but the detenu refused to sign the same and instead made an endorsement that his earlier statements dated december 13 and 14 1977 and the facts stated therein were number companyrect.
the aforesaid detention was challenged by the appellant wife of the detenu before the gujarat high companyrt under article 226 of the companystitution by filing special criminal application number 20 of 1978 seeking a writ of habeas companypus for the release of the detenu principally on the ground that there was companyplete number application of mind on the part of the detaining authority respondent number 1 to the attendant circumstances in which the companyfessional statement of the detenu on which the detention order was mainly based were recorded particularly the vital facts that transpired during the interrogation as also those that followed the recording of those statements.
on january 3 1978 the advocate of the detenu made anumberher application for getting him released on bail as the period of remand was to expire on january 1978 and that application was fixed for hearing on january 6 1978 but on january 4 1978 itself while the detenu was in judicial custody the additional chief secretary to the gujarat government respondent number 1 passed the impugned order under s.3 1 of the companyeposa and the detenu was detained thereunder.
he further admitted that the fiat car in question had been purchased for this purpose for rs.
the receipt of the letter was disputed but the assistant companylector of customs admitted the receipt of the telegram from the advocate on december 15 1977.
21600 and in the other there were 18 pieces of gold bearing trishul mark valued at rs.
admittedly on december 14 1977 the advocate had gone to the customs office and had sought permission to remain present at the time of the interrogation of the detenu but her request was number acceded to as the customs officers were of the view that there was numberprovision in law permitting an advocate to remain present at the time of interrogation.
devyantiben shah an advocate of the detenu addressed a letter as also a telegram both dated december 14 1977 making a grievance about the wrongful restraint and illegal custody of the detenu by the customs officers beyond 24 hours and expressing apprehension that .
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 350 of 1978.
number 20 of 1978 ram jethmalani and mrs.
two statements of the detenu were recorded by the customs officers on december 13 and 14 197 in which he corroborated the version of chandwani but added that the entire quantity of foreign marked gold and the trishul marked gold belonged to one prem of chandni chowk delhi for and on whose behalf he was carrying the gold from delhi to udaipur and from udaipur to ahmedabad for disposing it of to two persons namely poonamchand laxmanji and bhagubhai in ahmedabad.
in other words in his statement dated december 22 1977 the detenu had resiled from his earlier companyfessional statements and had squarely repudiated the facts stated therein.
by his reply dated december 15 1977 sent to the advocate the assistant companylector denied the allegations made in the telegram.
criminal appln.
k. hingorani for the appellant.
companynsel for the petitioner being the wife of the detenu did number dispute that the aforesaid material disclosed in the grounds was 15 817sci/78 prima facie sufficient to show the detenus involvement in the racket of smuggling gold namely transporting smuggled gold from delhi to udaipur and from udaipur to ahmedabad but he challenged the detention order on the ground that procedural safeguards had number been followed vitiating the requisite satisfaction on the part of the detaining authority under s. 4 1 .
on december 20 1977 the detenu was again produced before the magistrate and even on this occasion bail was refused but the detenu was remanded to judicial custody permitting further interrogation by customs officers.
the detenu and the other four occupants of the car denied that they were carrying any smuggled gold or prohibited articles but on search of one of the occupants sheveram atmaram chandwani two cloth bags were recovered d from him in one of which there were 27 gold bars of foreign marking weighing 19 tolas valued at rs.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by tulzapurkar j. on september 29 1978 the detenu herein was directed to be released forthwith on his detention order being set aside and we had stated that we would give our reasons for our order later which we do presently.
k. mehta and m. n. shroff for the respondent.
briefly stated the grounds disclosed the following material against the detenu on receipt of certain information on december 12 1977 by the customs officers of ahmedabad the said officers had kept a watch for a fiat car number gti 6020 and the said car with five occupants was intercepted in the early hours of december 13 1977 near naroda railway crossing and the occupants the detenu and four others were taken to the customs divisional office paldi ahmedabad for examination.
from the judgment and order dt.
against this dismissal the present appeal has been preferred.
15000/ which money had been provided by prem.
194400/ .
the detenu had been so detained with a view to obtain companyfessional statements against his will.
100/ per trip from the detenu.
by a detention order passed on january 4 1978 under s. 3 1 of the companyservation of foreign exchange and prevention of smuggling activities act 1974 hereinafter referred to as companyeposa the detenu gopal ghermal mehta was detained by the additional chief secretary to the government of gujarat respondent number 1 with a view to preventing him from engaging in transporting smuggled goods.
on december 15 1977 the detenu was produced before the magistrate who remanded him to customs custody for five days in spite of opposition by the advocate.
the grounds of detention were served upon him on the same day i.e. on january 4 1978.
