CONTENTS OF THE SAID TELEGRAM ARE REPRODUCED BELOW .
8070 of 1981 are that the petitioner along with Lallu Govan Tandel alias Lallu Malbari, Narsingh Vallabhbhai Tandel the petitioners in the other two writ petitions and Narsinghbhai Daulabhbhai detenu since released indulged in smuggling of foreign goods such as fabrics, speakers, cassettes, video cassettes, wrist watches, refrigerators, silver, etc.
12/134 of Daman Municipal Area.
The allegation that 10 days were taken by the respondent in only deciding the representation and in companying to the companyclusion that he would number permit a lawyer to plead for revocation of the order of detention is, therefore, number companyrect.
5,30,281.50.
These petitions have numbermerits and are dismissed.For, in the penultimate paragraph of the grounds of detention, it was stated, companyies of the statements and other documents which have been taken into companysideration by the detaining authority are also enclosed as per the index attached underline mine .
The Law Secretary gave his opinion and referred the telegram to the Home Department on the same day i.e. 5th October, 1981.
The impugned order of detention dated 11th September, 1981 Annexure A together with the grounds of detention Annexure B were served on the petitioner on June 30,1981, which was the date of apprehension.
A letter in companyfirmation of the Advocates telegram was received from the Advocate of the petitioner in the office of the Administrator on 5.10.1981 and the same was replied to telegraphically on 7th October, 1981, reiterating the earlier position as companyveyed in the said telegram of 6th October.
Tulsibhai and Mangalbhai, in the companyrse of interrogation, admitted that they were engaged by detenu Devji Vallabhbhai Tandel and Lallu Govan for unloading the packages companytaining companytraband goods.
In the Home Department it was sent by the Under Secretary Home to the Chief Secretary and by the latter to the Chief Minister the same day.
On 6th October, 1981, it was examined by the Lt.
It was referred to the law Department on 3rd October, 1981 itself and through usual channels reached the Law Secretary on 5th October, 1981, the 4th of October being a Sunday.
14/3/80/HD G Administrator of Goa, Daman Diu, Cabo Raj Niwas, Caranzalem P.O. Goa.
REFERENCE YOUR LETTER DATED 1ST OCTOBER 1981 REGARDING DETENTION OF SARVASHRI DEVJI VALLABHBHAI TANDEL AND NARSINBHAI DURLABBHAI TANDEL DETAINED UNDER COFEPOSA ACT RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR ON 5/10/1981 .
To give further details, the telegram of the petitioners Advocate was received in the Administrators office on 3rd October, 1981, and was sent to the Joint Secretary Home the same day.
ORDER WHEREAS, I, Jagmohan, Administrator of Goa, Daman and Diu, am satisfied with respect to the person known as Shri Devji Vallabhbhai Tandel alias Devji Boss son of Shri Vallabhbhai Tandel residing at H.No.
YOUR TELEGRAM DATED 1ST OCTOBER 1981 REFERRED THERElN HAD BEEN REPLIED UNDER THIS DEPARTMENTS TELEGRAM OF EVEN NUMBER DATED 6TH OCTOBER 1981 AND ITS COPIES HAVE ALSO BEEN SENT To THE CONCERNED DETENUS AT CENTRAL JAIL AGUADA .
23 of 1982 and Lallubhai Govanbhai Tandel petitioner in Writ Petition No.
Governor and the reply was sent to the petitioner on the same day.
8070 of 1981, 23 and 29 of 1982.
The last point raised by Mr. Jethmalani was that the cases of the four detenus companynected with the same incident were reviewed by the Board after having released one companydetenu, namely Narasinghbhai Durlabhbhai, in pursuance of the Advisory Boards order, it was incumbent on the detaining authority to review the order of detention of the petitioners before us namely Devji Vallabhbhai Tandel, petitioner in Writ Petition No.
These goods were kept there by two persons, namely Tulsibhai Ranchhodhbhai Tandel and Mangalbhai Bhula bhai Tandel engaged by the aforesaid four detenus for lifting the said 36 packages from a vessel grounded in sea off Ghati Sheri, Nani Daman.
The aforesaid Tulsidas and Mangalbhai made certain statements on 2nd July, 1981 implicating the aforesaid four persons including the petitioner.
be goods in 36 packages were recovered from House No.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution Ram Jethmalani and Miss Rani Jethmalani for the Petitioners.
YOUR REQUEST FOR APPEARANCE BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR AND REPRESENT THE CASE OF THE AFORESAID DETENUS HAS BEEN CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR AND HE HAS DECIDED THAT THE DETENUS CAN MAKE REPRESENTATION TO THE ADMINISTRATOR THROUGH CENTRAL JAIL AGUADA WHERE THEY ARE DETAINED .
In the process Tulsibbai Ranchhodhbhai and Mangalbhai Bhulabhai were accosted and each had a package with him and on being led by them the customs squad reached the house bearing municipal No.
In addition to the above explanation of the respondent in para 9 of the companynter affidavit, we perused the file and we are satisfied that there was numberdelay in disposal.
This petition is directed against the order dated 11th September, 1981 made under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 the COFEPOSA by the Administrator of Goa, Daman and Diu hereinafter the Administrator , detaining the petitioner with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods.
YOUR TELEGRAM DATED 1ST OCTOBER 1981 ADDRESSED TO THE ADMINISTRATOR GOA DAMAN AND DIU REGARDING DETENTION OF SARVASHRI DEVJI VALLABHBHAI TANDEL AND NARSINBHAI DURLABHBHAI TANDEL DETAINED UNDER COFEPOSA ACT .
The Advocate of the petitioner was telegraphically informed on 6th October 1981 that the request had been duly companysidered by the Adminis trator who had decided that the detenu companyld make a representation to the Administrator through the Superintendent, Central Jail, Aguada, where he was detained and that the same would receive his due companysideration as and when it was received.
This request was duly examined and it was felt that under the law, the detenu is number entitled to be represented by an Advocate and the Detaining Authority is number legally bound to grant the prayer made on behalf of the detenu.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition CRL Nos.
8070 of 1981.
29 of 1982 .
1/255, Fenta Sheri, Vadi Falia, Nani Daman, that with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods.
A companyy of the said telegram sent to the Advocate was also endorsed to the detenu and the same was received by him on 7th October, 1981.
The companytraband goods recovered were worth Rs.
8070 of 1981 , Narsingh Vallabhbhai Tandel, petitioner in Writ Petition No.
THE REPRESENTATION OF THE AFORESAID DETENUS WILL RECEIVE HIS DUE CONSIDERATION AS AND WHEN THEY ARE RECEIVED .
When the Customs squad was keeping a watch on Nani Daman companyst, a vessel was found in the sea and goods were being unloaded.
The material facts in a nutshell as alleged in the grounds of detention in Writ Petition No.
Eduardo Falireo and Miss A. Subhashini for the Respondents.
The reply was received by the petitioner detenu on 7th October, 1981.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BAHARUL ISLAM, J. These three writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India involve companymon questions of facts and law.
As on a perusal of the report of the Advisory Board, it was found that Narsinh Vallabhbhai Tandel was advised to be released on the ground of tender age, learned companynsel did number press the submission.
It is necessary to make the following order Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers companyferred by section 3 1 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 I, Jagmohan, Administrator of Goa, Daman and Diu direct that the said Shri Devji Vallabhbhai Tandel be detained at the Central Jail, Aguada, and the enclosed grounds of detention be served on him.
