SAFIYABANOO MOHAMMED ARIF RIZVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(BOM)-2007-9-114
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on September 05,2007

SAFIYABANOO MOHAMMED ARIF RIZVI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MUKESH T.BORA V/S.UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BHAWARLAL GANESHLAL VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
SUBHASH MULJIMAL GANDHI VS. L HIMINGLIANA [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL FULCHAND SHAH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. ARVIND SHERGILL [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MUNEESH SUNEJA [REFERRED TO]
KASIM KADAR KUNHI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

S. Radhakrishnan, J. - (1.)By this petition, the petitioner who is the mother of the detenu is challenging an order of detention dated 24th May, 1999 passed by the Joint Secretary of Government of India under Sec.3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, (hereinafter stated as the "said Act" for brevity sake), with a view to prevent the detenu Iqbal in future from acting in any manner prejudicial to the conservation of foreign exchange. The order of detention was passed and the detenu was directed to be kept in the Central Prison, at Mumbai. Alongwith the said order detailed grounds were furnished to the detenu Iqbal.
(2.)The learned Counsel Mr.Maqsood Khan, appearing on behalf of the detenu challenges the above detention order only on two grounds. Firstly, that the order was not justified from the materials placed before the detaining authority as the material do not disclose the activities to be prejudicial to the conservation of foreign exchange as the exact quantity of foreign currency purchased by the detenu from Riyaz Kashmiri has not been quantified. In view thereof, it was submitted that there is non application of mind. Secondly, the learned Counsel Mr.Maqsood Khan appearing on behalf of the detenu has contended that there is a gross delay in passing the detention order inasmuch as more than 10 months had lapsed from the time of disclosure of the detenu s name on 15th May, 1998 and also that the said detention order was not executed for over seven and half years, and even at the time of execution on 11th September, 2006 the detaining authority ought to have considered whether the detention was really needed or not.
(3.)The brief facts are that the Respondents found that one Riyaz Ahmed Kashmiri and Javed Ahmed Kashmiri were indulging in large scale illegal sale of foreign currency in an organised manner especially to enable passengers illegally carrying the said foreign currency abroad. The modus operendi appears to be that the said Riyaz Ahmend Kashmiri and Javed Ahmed Kashmiri alongwith Iqbal, the detenu herein, used to obtain various passports of different persons for the purpose of securing employment abroad and keep photocopies of the relevant pages and thereafter affixing the seal of M/ s Empire Exchange Bureau filling in the amount of foreign exchange, and attaching BTQ application form, the form used to be forged as if it was signed by the persons indicated in the passport. It appears that the detenu also used to sign those BTQ applications i.e.forged applications and deposit the cash amount and obtain pay order in favour of other FFMCs and used to sign cheques for obtaining pay orders, and the foreign exchange so obtained will be sold at a premium to passengers who were going abroad. The aforesaid passengers who were actually carrying the said foreign exchange were totally different from the name under which the foreign exchange was obtained. It appears that the said Riyaz Ahmed Kashmiri and Javed Ahmed Kashmiri had purchased over two lakhs US Dollars in the year 1997 itself and the overall amount appeared around 41,55,611 US Dollars, and 23,000 Pounds Sterlings were also purchsed in this manner and sold at a premium. The grounds of detention served on the detenu sets out in detail all the aforesaid facts and the exact involvement of the detenu, and ultimately the authority after satisfying itself the necessity to prevent the detenu from indulging in such activity and to conserve foreign exchange, the aforesaid detention order was passed, which is impugned in this Petition.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.