ASHOK KUMAR CHOUDHARY Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing an order of detention issued under Sec. 3 (1) (ii) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cofeposa'). From the statements made in the application and the documents annexed thereto it appears that on 25.7.1985 the truck bearing No. BIU 8485 belonging to the petitioner was seized at Raghopur Railway Crossing in the district of Saharsa by the Customs (Preventive) Party and on Inspection contraband Ganja was found on the truck. The driver of the truck was arrested and produced before the Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Virpur at Supaul, who remanded him to jail custody. According to the petitioner, he having learnt as out the seizuxrte of the truck aforesaid filed an application for release of the truck which was released by order dated 1.1.1987 to the petitioner on furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Court.

(2.) After more than a year from the date of the seizure the petitioner was arrested on 24.8.1986 and the order of detention which had been issued on 29.4.1986 was served on him. The grounds of detention was served on the petitioner on 25.8.1986. From the order of detention and grounds the petitioner learnt that he has been taken in custody under an order issued under sub -section (1) (ii) of Sec. 3 of the Cofeposa because of the seizure of his truck on 25.7.1985 aforesaid in which contraband Ganja weighing about 82 quintals had been found. After arrest the petitioner filed his representation on 28.9.1986 which was forwarded by the jail authority on 29.9.1986. The representation was rejected by the State Government on 26.12.1986.

(3.) On behalf of the petitioner it was urged that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, there has been unusual delay in issuance of the detention order as well as in considering the representation filed on behalf of the petitioner after he was taken in custody which shall vitiate the detention of the petitioner. In this connection it was. pointed out that although the truck was seized on 25.7.1985 the Customs Department forwarded the proposal for detention of the petitioner to the State Government no 24.2.1986 i.e. after seven months of the seizure. The proposal was received on 27.2.1986 by the State Government but no concrete step was taken till 24.3.1986. On 24.3.1986, the Joint Secretary made proposal to the Special Secretary for issuance of an order of detention. On 30th March, 1986, the file was endorsed by the Special Secretary to the Chief Minister, who approved the same on 1.4.1986. Although the Chief Minister had approved the proposal on 1.4.1986, the order of detention was issued on 29.4.1986. According to the petitioner, there is no reasonable explanation for the delay between 1.4.1986 and 29.4.1986 It was pointed out that the same delay has been caused in the disposal of the representation of the petitioner which was filed on 28.9.1986 and rejected on 26.12.1986 i. e. after three months from the date it was filed on behalf of the petitioner. This delay has also not been explained by the respondent State, according to the petitioner.