The statement of one Ramchandra Schedeva Rajbher is also referred to.
The statement also referred to the detenu helping his uncle Vinod Sakarlal Kapadia in delivery of smuggled fabrics.
Kantilal further disclosed that in the year 1973 the detenu had accompanied one Mohmed Bilal with foreign currency.
Mr. Phadke, the learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the State, submitted that the statement shows that the activities of the detenu after 1974 were also included in the grounds furnished for detention.
The High Court negatived all the companytentions raised on behalf of the detenu and held that the order of detention was validly made.
Reference is also made to the statements recorded from one Mohmed Bilal Haji Usmangani on 8th Novemher, 1976 and 9th Novemher, 1976 before the Customs officers wherein it was stated that the detenu was one of the trusted men of the aforesaid Mohmed Kutchi and always remained with him and used to he1p Mohmed Kutchi in managing his smuggling activities.
A reading of these grounds makes it clear that the incidents referred to relate to the years l973 and 1974 and that due to examination of three persons Kantilal Amratlal Thakkar, Mohmed Bilal Haji Usmangani and Ramchandra Sahadeva Rajbher, fuller particulars regarding the activities of the detenu came to be known prima facie it appears that the information which the Customs authorities received related to the activities of the detenu in 1973 and 1974.
It is further stated that the Customs, officers companytacted one Karltilal Amratlal Thakkar, who was working as accountant of Mohmed Kutchi.
5,000 p.m. for ar ranging landing of companytraband goods.
According to the statement dated 11th october, 1976 it was stated that the detenu remained present along with one Umer Ibrahim Billimoria and his gang at Kadodra kamraj near poultry farm where trucks loaded with camouflaged companysignments were being fed with smuggled cargo.
Further, he stated As pointed out in the grounds material indicating the involvement of the detenu in the incidents of 6.8.74 and 25 8 74 and his close association with Shri Mohmed Kutchi, a numberorious smuggler, came to be known in october, November and December, 1976 x x x x I say that the material on the basis of which the detenu was earlier detained was scanty and numbernew material indicating involvement of the detenu as alleged against him came to the light till october, 1976.
In the affidavit filed by the 4th respondent Additional Secretary to the Government of India, it is stated in paragraph 5 of his affidavit that he companysidered the detention order, grounds of detention relating to the detenu as well as the report in respect of the detention order by the State Government under section 3 3 and was personally satisfied that the detenu Virendra Ramniklal Kapadia Kumar engages and is likely to engage in transporting smuggled goods Mr. P. M. Shah Under Secretary to the Government of Gujarat, in paragraph 10 of his affidavit stated that fresh material showing the involvement of the detenu in the activity of transporting smuggled goods was companylected by the Customs authorities and therefore it was open to the State Government to pass a fresh order of detention.
This appeal is preferred by the wife of one Virendra Ramniklal Kapadia,, a detenu, by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad dismissing the writ petition for the issue of a writ of habeas companypus.
The case for the State.
105 of 1978 with W.P. No.
appears to be that they regarded the material on the basis of which the detenu was earlier detained was scanty and fuller particulars came to light in october, 1976 indicating involvement of the detenu in the incidents of 6th August, 1974 and 25th August, 1974.
B.Datar and Miss A. Subhashini for respondents 4 5.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
We number proceed to give reasons for our order.
Application No.
A. No.
27.9.77 of the Gujarat High Court in Criminal Spl.
On the same day by another order issued under section S of the COFEPOSAA the 2nd respondent directed that the detenu shall be detained in the Ahmedabad Central Prison.
In pursuance of the above orders the detenu has been detained in the Ahmedabad Central prison after he surrendered on 4th July, 1977.
176 of 1977 .
N. Shroff for respondents 1 3.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAILASAM, J. After hearing the arguments we allowed the appeal on 5 10 1978 and directed that the detenu be set at liberty forthwith indicating that the detailed judgment would follow.
The grounds of detention were supplied to him on 6th July, 1977.
N. Phadke and B. D. Sharma and M. N. Shroff for respondent No 1 Girish Chandra for respondent number4.
the detention of the detenu under section 3 1 c and section 3 2 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971.
833/78.
The detention order passed under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act A was cancelled on 9th December, 1974 and the detenu was released.
Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dt.
A declaration under section 12A, sub section 2 was also passed on the same day by the 2nd respondent stating that it was necessary to detain the detenu for dealing effectively with emergency.
This would indicate that for the fresh order of detention the basis was availability of fuller details regarding clients on which the earlier detention was ordered.
On 22nd September, 1974 the District Magistrate, Surat, directed.
Ram Jethmalani and H. S. Parihar for the appellant in Cr.
To incidents are given one relating to an incident on 6th August, 1974 and the other to an incident on 25 August, 1974.
105 and WP No.
The detenu was supplied with the grounds of detention on 27th September, 1974.
833 of 1978.
On 7th February, 1977 by an order under section 3 1 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 hereinafter referred to as COFEPOSAA in the name of Governor, the Under Secretary to Government, respondent 2, directed that it was necessary to detain the detenu with a view to preventing him from engaging in transporting smuggled goods.
