DHANPAT SINGH SURANA Vs. UNION OF INDIA
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
DHANPAT SINGH SURANA
UNION OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)THIS is an application by the respondents for vacating the interim order of injunction passed by Mr. Justice Janah on 20th December, 1974 while issuing the above Rule. The petitioner moved an application under Article 226 of tie constitution wherein he, inter alia, prayed, for :-a) Declaration that Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 and in particular Section 3 thereof is ultra vires the Constitution ; b) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus do issue calling upon the respondents and each of them to recall, withdraw and[or to revoke the Proclamation of Emergency dated December 3, 1971 and not to give effect to the same in any manner whatsoever. c) A Writ in the nature of Mandamus do issue directing the Respondents and each of them not to give any effect to the provisions of the said Act of 1974 and not to issue or enforce or give any effect to any order of detention against your petitioner allegedly passed or to be passed under Section 3 of the said act and not to take step or further step there under and to withdraw, recall and revoke any such order of detention against your petitioner. d) A Rule asking the Respondents and each of them to certify and produce before this Hon'ble court all records and proceedings relating to the purported order of detention passed or to be passed against your petitioner, as threatened, under the said Act of 1974 so that justice may be done by quashing and setting aside such purported order by a Writ of Certiorari. e) Rule Nisi do issue in terms of the prayers above.
(2.)AN interim injunction was granted to the effect that till the final dents and each of them were restrained dents and each of them were re-stained from issuing or enforcing or giving effect to any purported order of detention issued or to be issued against the petitioner under the Conservation of foreign Exchange and Prevention of smuggling Activities Act, 1974 and from restraining and detaining the petitioner under the said Act or any other law of preventive detention.
(3.)PETITIONER carries on business as exporters of textile goods. On or about March 4, 1969 the business premises of the petitioner at Gauhati, Assam was searched by the Enforcement Officer of the Enforcement Directorate. Petitioner subsequently came to know that a complaint had been lodged by the Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate with the Director of Central bureau of Investigation, New Delhi with respect to certain transactions in foreign Exchange between the years 1968 and 1969. Against the said search and seizure, the petitioner moved a Writ Petition in this Court and obtained a Rule Nisi, being Matter No. 130 of 1970 and an interim order of injunction. That Rule was ultimately discharged by Mr. Justice Sabyasachi mukharji, Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, being appeal No. 53 of 1972, which is still pending in this Court. On 1st of April, 1972 the residence of the petitioner at Calcutta was also searched under a search warrant issued by the Assistant director, Enforcement Directorate. Thereafter, the petitioner received a memorandum dated 3rd February, 1973 by which he was directed to show cause why adjudication proceedings should not be held against him for the alleged contravention of the provisions of section 5 (1) (c) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 in respect of certain payments to the parties in india on behalf of and under instruction of a person resident outside India as per list attached to the said memorandum. Petitioner replied to the said show cause. He was informed that the adjudication proceedings against him would be held.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.