RAJESH GULATI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI
LAWS(SC)-2002-8-51
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: DELHI)
Decided on
August 29,2002
RAJESH GULATI
Appellant
VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
ICCHU DEVI CHORARIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]VIJAY NARAIN SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED]
RAMESH YADAV VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ETAH [REFERRED]
HEM LALL BHANDARI VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [REFERRED]
AYYA ALIAS AYUB VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED]
Cited Judgements :-
SATWINDER SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2003-2-52] [REFERRED]SHASHI GOYAL VS. UOI [LAWS(DLH)-2008-2-216] [REFERRED TO]
SANDIP AGARWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2005-6-51] [REFERRED TO]
MOHANDAS K N S/O K S NARAYANAN VS. JOINT SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA COFEPOSA [LAWS(KER)-2017-7-257] [REFERRED TO]
KATIMAN YADAV VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2012-9-146] [REFERRED]
T V SARAVANAN ALIAS S A R PRASANA VENKATACHAARIAR CHATURVEDI VS. STATE [LAWS(SC)-2006-2-85] [REFERRED TO]
MADHU GARG VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(P&H)-2004-4-8] [REFERRED TO]
HARI SINGH VS. STATE AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-7-37] [REFERRED TO]
JAGADISH NARAYAN SINGH VS. STATE OF ORISSA AND 3 ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-2008-9-68] [REFERRED TO]
Tmt S Tamilselvi VS. District Collector and District Magistrate [LAWS(MAD)-2003-10-202] [REFERRED TO]
DALBIN N. MARAK AND ORS. VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS. [LAWS(MEGH)-2015-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
HUIDROM KONUNGJAO SINGH VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(SC)-2012-5-44] [REFERRED TO]
C NEELA VS. STATE OF TELANGANA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (LAW AND ORDER) DEPARTMENT [LAWS(APH)-2017-6-97] [REFERRED TO]
BORIS SOBOTIC MIKOLIC VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-5-535] [REFERRED TO]
RAMAN KUMAR SHARMA ALIAS A K A PANDIT VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2009-5-212] [REFERRED TO]
SEDU ALTAF MOHAMMED YUSUF VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-1-282] [REFERRED TO]
DHAN KUMAR DEB BARMA ALIAS AROWA VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(GAU)-2006-1-79] [REFERRED TO]
NAJIR KHAN VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2008-1-43] [REFERRED TO]
KHOISNAM GUNABAN SINGH VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE IMPHAL WEST DISTRICT [LAWS(GAU)-2010-8-9] [REFERRED TO]
KAUSHAL MAHTO VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2014-8-50] [REFERRED TO]
PARWEZ KHAN @ PARWEZ ALAM VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2019-4-138] [REFERRED TO]
S Mohammed Ali VS. State [LAWS(MAD)-2003-9-55] [REFERRED TO]
VAHIDBHAI SAIYADBHAI SHEIKH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2003-8-61] [REFERRED]
RAHUL AMBADAS JADHAV VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-6-135] [REFERRED TO]
SATIF IQBAL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2005-1-25] [REFERRED TO]
ADARSH PAL SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2014-8-102] [REFERRED TO]
RADHA VS. SECRETARY TO GOVT PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT [LAWS(MAD)-2007-8-326] [REFERRED TO]
MATHINA BEGUM VS. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT COOPERATIION FOOD AND CONSUMER PROTECTION DEPT SECRETARIAT [LAWS(MAD)-2009-7-145] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM RAI VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2014-7-98] [REFERRED TO]
IBRAHIM NAZEER VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(SC)-2006-7-100] [REFERRED TO]
SENTHAMILSELVI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(SC)-2006-6-12] [REFERRED TO]
REKHA VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(SC)-2011-3-96] [REFERRED TO]
REKHA VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(SC)-2011-4-65] [REFERRED TO]
NAVPREET KAUR CHADHA VS. UOI [LAWS(DLH)-2013-4-53] [REFERRED TO]
K AMARNATH VS. COLLOECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE R R DIST [LAWS(APH)-2004-8-108] [REFERRED TO]
THOKCHOM RATAN SINGH VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, IMPHAL WEST AND OTHERS [LAWS(GAU)-2006-11-100] [REFERRED TO]
BALBIR KAUR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2005-1-34] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD BILAL YUNUS SHAH VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-1-232] [REFERRED TO]
SMTI. BELINA MARAK VS. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ,WEST GARO HILLS, WILLIAMNAGAR [LAWS(MEGH)-2015-10-10] [REFERRED]
MISTER YADAV VS. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH HOME SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA [LAWS(PAT)-2012-12-15] [REFERRED TO]
K SIVAKAMI KARKALAIMUDAYAN ALIAS KASAMADAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2007-10-145] [REFERRED TO]
SAMSUDEEN VS. SECRETARY TO GOVT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2007-11-80] [REFERRED TO]
GURUMAYUM RAJATKANTA SHARMA @ PROMISE @ GERMAN VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE [LAWS(GAU)-2008-5-48] [REFERRED TO]
VEINEIKIM HAOKIP VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2011-12-3] [RELIED ON]
RAJ KUMAR VS. UOI [LAWS(DLH)-2008-8-165] [REFERRED TO]
SHANTA PRAKASH SHEWALE VS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY [LAWS(BOM)-2012-8-111] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN CHHATURMAL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2004-1-8] [REFERRED TO]
INTEZAR UMAR DARAJ KHAN VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [LAWS(BOM)-2006-10-62] [REFERRED TO]
MARIAPPAN VS. DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE [LAWS(MAD)-2014-8-87] [REFERRED TO]
A GEETHA VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(SC)-2006-9-32] [REFERRED TO]
SAGAR SUNIL GAIKWAD VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, PUNE [LAWS(BOM)-2018-3-330] [REFERRED TO]
SHARAVAN KUMAR YADAV VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2012-1-273] [REFERRED TO]
HATKHONENG VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2011-7-9] [REFERRED TO]
FULLARA DEBBARMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2007-4-23] [REFERRED TO]
R Rajkumar VS. State of Tamil Nadu [LAWS(MAD)-2004-10-130] [REFERRED TO]
SUBRAT KUMAR NAIK VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2008-8-21] [REFERRED TO]
SITTHI ZURAINA BEGUM VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2002-11-72] [REFERRED TO]
M. KUDUBDEEN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2002-11-116] [REFERRED TO]
RAMANPREET KAUR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2019-11-197] [REFERRED TO]
KALA CHAND BANERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2003-7-65] [REFERRED TO]
PEBAM NINGOL MIKOI DEVI VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2010-2-3] [REFERRED TO]
LEEMA SEBASTIAN VS. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-8-105] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHMA M JAIN VS. GOVT OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2010-2-43] [REFERRED TO]
ATIKUR RAHAMAN VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(DLH)-2017-3-217] [REFERRED TO]
HAIDARSHA ABDULSHA PIR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2020-9-701] [REFERRED TO]
NASIR KHAN ALIAS BOI VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2007-10-15] [REFERRED TO]
SOIBAM JOY ALIAS LANGOL ALIAS LEILANGBA VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE IMPHAL WEST DISTRICT [LAWS(GAU)-2010-8-71] [REFERRED TO]
KHWAIRAKPAM ONGBI JAMUNA DEVI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2011-2-68] [REFERRED TO]
SHRAVAN KUMAR YADAV VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2013-1-133] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDSI SAH VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(APH)-2017-7-79] [REFERRED TO]
MUGHALI VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [LAWS(GAU)-2021-7-28] [REFERRED TO]
REKHA UMESH SHETTY VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2007-7-44] [REFERRED TO]
AMEENA BEGUM VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(SC)-2023-9-5] [REFERRED TO]
MOULANA SHAMSHUNNISA VS. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY [LAWS(SC)-2010-12-51] [REFERRED TO]
PUJARI SINGH SON OF JANARDAN SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS [LAWS(PAT)-2013-1-166] [REFERRED]
BHOLI SHARMA VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2014-6-59] [REFERRED TO]
ANTIM MANDAL VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2013-4-80] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
Ruma Pal, J. -
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)The appellant has challenged his detention pursuant to an order dated 28th September, 2001 passed under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
(3.)Prior to his detention under the impugned order, the appellant has been arrested on 5th July, 2001 by the Customs officers at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi on the allegation that he had smuggled 40 mobile telephones. The mobile phones were found hidden in a microwave oven. The microwave oven as well as the mobile telephones were seized and the collective value of the seized goods has been stated by the respondents to be Rs. 5, 16,000/-. At the time of his arrest, the appellant handed over his passport to the customs authorities. In the appellant's statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, it was stated by the appellant that the appellant was an employee of M/s. B.D. Denim. The appellant had also stated that he had made six trips of Dubai between 30 May, 2000 to 3rd July, 2001 at the instance of the proprietor of M/s. B.D. Denim and that except for the first occasion, the appellant had, on the instructions of and as arranged by the proprietor of M/s. B.D. Denim, brought into India various household items including mobile phones.
(2.)The appellant has challenged his detention pursuant to an order dated 28th September, 2001 passed under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
(3.)Prior to his detention under the impugned order, the appellant has been arrested on 5th July, 2001 by the Customs officers at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi on the allegation that he had smuggled 40 mobile telephones. The mobile phones were found hidden in a microwave oven. The microwave oven as well as the mobile telephones were seized and the collective value of the seized goods has been stated by the respondents to be Rs. 5, 16,000/-. At the time of his arrest, the appellant handed over his passport to the customs authorities. In the appellant's statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, it was stated by the appellant that the appellant was an employee of M/s. B.D. Denim. The appellant had also stated that he had made six trips of Dubai between 30 May, 2000 to 3rd July, 2001 at the instance of the proprietor of M/s. B.D. Denim and that except for the first occasion, the appellant had, on the instructions of and as arranged by the proprietor of M/s. B.D. Denim, brought into India various household items including mobile phones.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.