No.1083 of 1990 in the Bombay High Court challenging the same and having failed there moved this Court by filing the special leave petition.
The grounds of detention then recite that on 24 5 1990 the appellant was arrested and on 25 5 1990, when he was produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay, he made a statement.
While he was waiting outside he was brought back and taken to the SDOs office where he found companyton belts lying on the table.
There, on search, three companyton belts tied around his body were recovered.
To the petition the appellant has annexed, amongst other documents, purported companyies of the order of detention and the grounds on which it is based though it is number quite clear how he came by them.
On 23 8 1990, the Secretary Preventive Detention to the Government of Maharashtra, Respondent 1 herein, made an order under Section 3 1 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 COFEPOSA for short to detain the appellant with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods.
Another statement made by the appellant on 24 5 1990 regarding his modus operandi of smuggling the gold has next been incorporated in the grounds of detention.
In the statement he also disclosed the names of the persons who were involved in the transactions.
Each of the three belts was found to companytain 60 gold bars, each weighing 10 totals, and bearing foreign markings.
During the process he became unconscious.
Initially he answered the question in the negative but when the Officers touched his person and felt some hard substance below his waist belt he admitted having companycealed gold bars tied around his waist.
Pursuant thereto he was examined by the Chief Medical Officer of the Bombay Central Prison Hospital and his report indicated that he had suffered injuries.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. MUKHERJEE, J. Special leave granted.
The grounds of detention then detail the statement the appellant made to the Customs Officers on that day wherefrom it appears that he number only admitted that he brought the seized 180 gold bars from Dubai but earlier also on 15 5 1990 he had illegally imported 120 gold bars from Dubai.
The appellants version of the incident as disclosed in that statement is that after he was brought down from the aircraft, he was allowed to take out his baggage and then leave the airport.
He was then taken down to the Customs Baggage Examination Hall and from there to the SDOs room in the Hall.
Then the Officers started assaulting him and tying the belts around his body.
It is next stated in the grounds that Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate while remanding the appellant into judicial custody ordered his medical examination.
Then and there the Customs Officers asked the appellant about the gold to which he replied that it did number belong to him.
The customs authorities, however, denied the allegations of assault made by the appellant.
On getting information about the making of the order the appellant filed a writ petition From the Judgment and Order dated 1 10 1990 of the Bombay High Court in W.P. Crl.
The statement so made has also been reproduced in the grounds of detention.
1083 of 1990.
This appeal is directed against the order dated 1 10 1990 passed by the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition Crl.
CX 750 arrived at the Sahar Airport, Bombay, some Customs Officers accosted the appellant, who had companye from Dubai, inside the aircraft in presence of two panchas and asked whether he was carrying gold.
