- (1.) This petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for a writ of habeas corpus is filed by Smt. Pushpa describing herself as the wife of Shri Pala Singh, son of Shri Sarwan who has been detained by an order made by the third respondent, Chief Secretary, Delhi Administration, on 27th January 1979 under Section 3 (1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 ('COFEPSA' for short).
(2.) Validity of the detention of the detenu has been questioned inter alia on the following grounds: 1. Two representations dated 23rd February and 27th March 1979 made by the detenu have been dealt with and rejected by Chief Secretary who was not competent to reject the same as the representations, if any, by the detenu have to be dealt with and decided by the appropriate Government which in the instant case would imply the Administrator of the Union Territory of Delhi, viz., Ltd. Governor. 2. The order confirming the detention of the detenu after obtaining the opinion of the Advisory Board is invalid as the same has been confirmed beyond the prescribed period of three months, the delay being of three days. 3. The Constitutional right of the detenu to make a representation was seriously undermined because of the inordinate delay in complying with the request of the detenu for copies of the documents from 9th February to 9th March. 1979. 4. Rejection of the representation dated 23rd February 1979 after an unreasonable delay is violative of Article 22 of the Constitution and, therefore, the order of detention is vitiated. 5. Presumably the second representation dated 27th March, 1979 made by the detenu was not placed before the Advisory Board with the comments of the State Government and any action taken pursuant to the opinion of the Advisory Board would, therefore, be bad in law. 6. An incorrect belief entertained by the detaining authority that the detenu was a Pakistani national, unwarranted in the facts and circumstances of the case, has resulted in the detaining authority's decision being influenced by an extraneous irrelevant and incorrect consideration which would vitiate the order of detention.
(3.) Before dealing with the contentions seriatim a few relevant dates may be noticed.;