V.K.JHANJI, J. - (1.) THIS petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Virsa Singh, petitioner, for quashing detention Order dated 28.2.1989 and grounds of detention dated 28.2.1989.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts are that on 5.2.1989, truck No. DIG-3677, on 6.2.1989 truck No. DIG-2177 and on 9.2.1989 truck No. DIG-2277 were intercepted by the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence. These trucks were intercepted at different place in Punjab and Delhi. The occupants of the above trucks, namely Jagir singh @ Jagira, Multan Singh s/o Jagat Singh, Inderjit Singh s/o Buta Singh, Satnam Singh @ Satta. Mohinder Singh, Balbir Singh and Chhinder Singh, were arrested under Section 104 of the Customs Act and their statements recorded under Section 108 of the said Act, in which they stated that petitioner was actively associated in the smuggling of gold biscuits recovered on different dates from different trucks, and from different person. On 28.2.1989, the Joint Secretary to Govt. of India, Department of Revenue, specially empowered under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (as amended) (in short, the 1974 Act), made an order to detain the petitioner with a view to prevent him from smuggling goods. On getting information of the detention order having been passed, petitioner filed a writ petition No. C-O No. 3039 (W) of 1989 on 27.3.1989 in the Calcutta High Court, but the same was dismissed by the Calcutta High Court on 12.8.1992. Before the detention order could be executed against the petitioner, he filed Civil Writ Petition No. 573 of 1993 in this Court, which on 3.11.1993, was got dismissed as withdrawn with permission to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action. Thereafter, the present petition was filed in this Court on 30.11.1993. To this petition, petitioner has annexed the purported copies of order of detention and the grounds of detention on which the order is based. However, it has not been averred in the petition as to how petitioner came into possession of these documents. The order of detention is being sought to be quashed on the ground that the same is dated 28.2.1989 and has not been executed for a period more than five years and thus, has lost its efficacy and the purpose for which it was passed. According to the petition as well as according to the counsel for the petitioner, at this belated stage the execution of detention order would be punitive and not preventive, which is not permissible under Detention Law. Upon notice of the petition, written statement has been filed by the respondent by way of an affidavit of Sh. K.L. Verma, Joint Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi, wherein it has been stated that the petition deserves to be dismissed not only on merits, but also on the ground that petitioner is permanently residing and engaged in business at Delhi and, therefore, writ petition in this Court is not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction. It has also been stated that the writ petition is not maintainable where the detention order has not been executed upon the detenu. It has further been stated that petitioner is absconding and as such, could not be detained so far.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner in order to meet the preliminary objection as to whether the detenu or anyone on his behalf is entitled to challenge an order of detention without the detenu submitting or surrendering to it, contended that this Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the petition in case the detenu satisfies this Court that the grounds on which detention order is made, are vague, extraneous and based upon irrelevant grounds.;