• Sign In/Sign Up
  • Menu
  • +Clients Back

    • Get Free Legal Answers
    • Get Fee Estimates
    • Find Lawyers
  • +Lawyers

    • Case Diary & Office Manager
    • Post News & Artilces
    • Post Jobs & Internships
  • +Law Students

    • Campus Ambassadors
    • Find Jobs & Internships
    • Post News & Articles
    • Resource Sharing
  • +Law Schools

    • Post Admissions
    • Post Opportunities
    • Get Law School Rating

  • Home
  • News/Articles
  • The Conduct of Abscondence cannot preclude absconder from detention: Delhi HC

Latest News

Back

The Conduct of Abscondence cannot preclude absconder from detention: Delhi HC

Courtesy/By: Shaily Garg  |  15 Sep 2020     Views:499

The Conduct of Abscondence cannot preclude absconder from detention: Delhi HC

Three separate writ petitions were made by the petitioner seeking similar reliefs in this case of Mohd. Nashruddin Khan v. Union of India &Ors. Since the issues raised in all the three petitions were the same, therefore the case was decided by the common judgment. These petitions were made to quash a detention order dated 21st January 2020 issued by the Government under Section 3(1) and Section 7(1)(b) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA Act).

 Facts of the Case:

In this case, the petitioner ‘Mohd. Nashruddin Khan’ is a non-resident Indian Citizen who is engaged in the business of trading in gold jewelry in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). A private jewelry exhibition was arranged by the petitioner in which an employee of M/s Its My Name Pvt. Ltd. was invited. After completion of the Exhibition, when the Petitioner and Employee of the M/s Its My Name Pvt. Ltd. on his return to India landed at the IGI Airport and walked to the red channel, they were detained by the officers at the exit gate and a notice was issued under Section 102 of the Customs Act, 1962 alleging invasions of customs duty on the same day. The Chartered Accountant of the petitioner was also arrested. A self-incriminating proclamation of the petitioner was recorded under coercion in which he disclosed his personal information. However, the statement made under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 was retracted by the petitioner in the Court.

 The Contentions of the Parties:

It was contended by the counsel on behalf of the petitioner that there was inordinate delay in passing of the Detention order and the culmination of the investigation was done in the issuance of show cause notice, Therefore, the link between the prejudicial acts which form the basis of the Detention Orders and the purpose of detention is snapped.

It was presented by the Petitioner that a large number of documents had not been placed before the Detaining Authority and the same was not considered to form satisfaction to be detained Under Section 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act. It was held by the Supreme Court that the five conditions on which a Detention Order can be challenged at the pre-execution stage were illustrative only, and not exhaustive and further, non-placement of vital documents before the detaining authority would be a good ground to quash a Detention Order at the pre-execution stage.[1]

It was further submitted by the counsel on behalf of the Petitioner that “In respect of the notifications issued under Section 7(1)(b) of the COFEPOSA Act, 1974, all the three notifications have been issued as acts of malice. There was no question of issuing a notification under Section 7(1)(b) of the COFEPOSA Act, 1974 within a matter of a few months of the issuance of the Detention Order”.

Contrary to the submissions made by the petitioner, it was battled by the Counsel on Behalf of the Respondent that reliance made by the petitioner from the above judgment of the Supreme Court is misplaced and invalid. It was submitted that all the relevant and vital documents were placed before the Detaining Authority and only after their abstract satisfaction, the Detention Order was passed. There was no delay in passing and execution of the Detention Orders and no averments could be made by the petitioner at the pre-execution stage.

 Observations and Conclusions of the Court:

It was observed by the Court that “There is no doubt that a Detention Order can validly be assailed even at the pre-execution stage, however, an order of detention passed by a detaining authority under the relevant ‘preventive detention’ law cannot be set aside by a writ court at the pre-execution or pre-arrest stage unless the court is satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances” .Also, there is no resemblance between prosecution in the court of law and a detention order passed under the COFEPOSA Act, 1974 which made Article 14 inapplicable.

The Court is of the view that the time consumed in mooting the proposal for the detention of the petitioner under the COFEPOSA Act, 1974 and considering the said proposal by the Central Screening Committee is justified and it does not meddle with the live-link between the prejudicial activity of the petitioners and the object of the detention, hence, the equivalent cannot be snapped.

The Court further observed that the detention orders issued against the Petitioner could not be executed despite the sincere endeavours of the local police and hence there is no merit for the challenge raised by the petitioner to the notifications issued under Section 7(1)(b) of the COFEPOSA Act, 1974 because the petitioner was absconded and precluded from assailing the Detention.

From the above observations and contentions of the parties, the court is of the view that there is no merit in the submission of the petitioners that neither of three was absconding. “Abscondence is not only a matter of physical disappearance but also carries with it the intent to hide, disappear, or evade the concerned person, or authority”. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to maintain these writ petitions because of the conduct of absconding, and hence, no merit can be found in any of the grounds taken by the Petitioner to assail the Detention Order issued under Section 3 of the COFEPOSA Act.

 

[1]Deepak Bajaj v. State of Maharashtra and Another, (2008) 16 SCC 14. 

 


Document:


Courtesy/By: Shaily Garg  |  15 Sep 2020     Views:499

News Updates

The Legal Framework of Bail Conditions in India: B...
25 Oct 2024     Views:5986
Changing an Arbitrator Mid-Proceeding: Legal Frame...
23 Oct 2024     Views:5408
IMF Retains India's FY25 GDP Growth Forecast at 7%...
22 Oct 2024     Views:5388
The Evolving Landscape of Russian Anti-Suit Injunc...
22 Oct 2024     Views:5181
Hyundai’s IPO vs Competitors: How the Auto Giant...
15 Oct 2024     Views:5203
The Validity of Arbitration Agreements Post Decree...
14 Oct 2024     Views:4850
SEBI Issues Checklist for AIFs, Their Managers, an...
08 Oct 2024     Views:5238
The Siemens v. Russian Railroads Case...
07 Oct 2024     Views:5228
Empowering Minds in Confinement: Bombay HC’s Lan...
03 Oct 2024     Views:5346
The Dynamics of Novation in Contract Law and Its I...
02 Oct 2024     Views:5530
SEBI Establishes Consistent Evaluation Standards f...
01 Oct 2024     Views:5237
Landmark Decision by Austrian Supreme Court on Arb...
30 Sep 2024     Views:5212
Key Considerations for Indian Commercial Claims...
25 Sep 2024     Views:5163
Boom or Bust: Africa’s Oil Giants Face Declining...
23 Sep 2024     Views:5282
The Growing Role of Arbitration in Intellectual Pr...
23 Sep 2024     Views:5240
Supreme Court Greenlights Sub-Classification of SC...
20 Sep 2024     Views:5564
SEBI's Employee Grievances Prompt Formation of Wor...
19 Sep 2024     Views:5392
Environmental Law in India: Challenges and Opportu...
18 Sep 2024     Views:6228
Navigating the New Legal Landscape of Exclusive Ju...
16 Sep 2024     Views:5355
The Anatomy of Joint Venture Breakups in India (an...
31 Jul 2024     Views:5699
The Integration of ESG in India's M&A Landscape...
31 Jul 2024     Views:5601
Future of AI in Legal Systems and Conflict Resolut...
21 Jul 2024     Views:5791
World Health Assembly Revises International Health...
21 Jul 2024     Views:5642
Pokemon GO Fans Concerned Over Restrictive New Ter...
21 Jul 2024     Views:5757
Landmark Judgment on Setting Aside Arbitration Awa...
21 Jul 2024     Views:5544
Understanding the Process of Issuing Summons in In...
11 Jul 2023     Views:8928
Understanding the Unlawful Activities (Prevention)...
10 Jul 2023     Views:7474
Understanding the Mental Health Act in India: A St...
09 Jul 2023     Views:7515
Combating Manual Scavenging in India: A Call for S...
07 Jul 2023     Views:7312
Impleadment in Supreme Court of India: A Comprehen...
05 Jul 2023     Views:8267
Unraveling the Distinction: Culpable Homicide vs. ...
03 Jul 2023     Views:7612
Understanding the Difference between Money Bills a...
02 Jul 2023     Views:6153
Understanding the Civil Procedure Code in India: A...
01 Jul 2023     Views:6928
The Rights of Criminals in India: Upholding Justic...
30 Jun 2023     Views:6190
Exploring the Differences between the US and India...
29 Jun 2023     Views:6197
What to Do If the Police Refuse to Register Your F...
26 Jun 2023     Views:6443
Timeline of Environmental Protocols: A Global Effo...
25 Jun 2023     Views:6145
How to Deal with Cheque Bounce Cases in India...
24 Jun 2023     Views:6125
Pursuing a Lucrative Litigation Career in Indian L...
22 Jun 2023     Views:6173
Understanding the Emergency Provisions of India: S...
21 Jun 2023     Views:6139
Environment Legislation in India: A Comprehensive ...
20 Jun 2023     Views:6495
Understanding the Emergency Powers of the Constitu...
18 Jun 2023     Views:5996
Understanding the Emergency Powers of the Constitu...
17 Jun 2023     Views:6024
Timeline of Same-Sex Laws in India: A Journey Towa...
16 Jun 2023     Views:6469
Sir Creek Dispute and Legal Implications...
15 Jun 2023     Views:6666
Jurisprudence of NDPS Laws in India: A Comprehensi...
14 Jun 2023     Views:6243
Impleadment Proceedings: A Comprehensive Guide to ...
13 Jun 2023     Views:6679
Understanding Continuing Mandamus: A Powerful Judi...
12 Jun 2023     Views:8652
Res Judicata: The Doctrine of Finality in Legal Pr...
10 Jun 2023     Views:6677
Mastering the Art of Legal Drafting: A Comprehensi...
08 Jun 2023     Views:6340
Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CP...
07 Jun 2023     Views:11983
Understanding the Laws of War: Protecting Humanity...
03 Jun 2023     Views:6059
Understanding the Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC...
02 Jun 2023     Views:6911
The National Drug and Psychotropic Substances (NDP...
01 Jun 2023     Views:6489
A Step-by-Step Guide: How to File an FIR in India...
31 May 2023     Views:6191
Zero FIR: An Effective Tool for Prompt Criminal Ju...
30 May 2023     Views:6423
Unveiling the Dissent of Judges in Judicial Judgme...
28 May 2023     Views:6064
Environmental Laws in India: Safeguarding Nature f...
25 May 2023     Views:6513
The Recusal of Supreme Court of India Judges from ...
24 May 2023     Views:6186
Understanding the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Cour...
23 May 2023     Views:6632
Article 142 of the Constitution of India: A Compre...
22 May 2023     Views:6844
Landmark Judgments in Arbitration Law in India: A...
21 May 2023     Views:7072
Landmark Cases on Anticipatory Bail in India: A Pa...
20 May 2023     Views:10964
Embracing the Future: How AI is Revolutionizing th...
18 May 2023     Views:6283
Understanding Narcotics Laws in India: A Comprehen...
17 May 2023     Views:6148
Understanding Indian Laws on Cross-Border Transact...
16 May 2023     Views:7275
ADR mechanism of legal adjudication in India...
15 May 2023     Views:5995
Validity of foreign arbitral award in India throug...
14 May 2023     Views:6009
Scope of Section 151 CPC...
13 May 2023     Views:7586
Detailed Overview on Section 482 of Crpc...
11 May 2023     Views:6535
Scope of Decree under CPC...
10 May 2023     Views:6087
Legal development of Arbitration Laws in India....
09 May 2023     Views:6131
Arbitration Laws in India...
07 May 2023     Views:6076
Impact of COVID-19 on Legal Industry...
06 May 2023     Views:8178
Chargesheet not having authority's valid sanction ...
02 May 2023     Views:6356
Same-Sex Marriage in India...
30 Apr 2023     Views:5998
National Commission for Women...
27 Apr 2023     Views:5850
Law making process of India....
26 Apr 2023     Views:6937
Bail Provisions in India...
25 Apr 2023     Views:5874
Life imprisonment in Criminal Law in India...
24 Apr 2023     Views:6289
Contempt of Court...
23 Apr 2023     Views:6129
The collegium system of Judiciary in India....
22 Apr 2023     Views:5814
Remarriage before Expiry of Limitation Period to f...
21 Apr 2023     Views:5812
Need for strict measure of NDPS laws in India....
20 Apr 2023     Views:5971
Nature of Offence under Section 138 of NI Act is Q...
19 Apr 2023     Views:8404
Order VII Rule 11 CPC: Plaint cannot be rejected m...
18 Apr 2023     Views:7012
Mediation: At the Dawn of Golden Age organized at ...
16 Apr 2023     Views:6095
Central Government's motto should be mediate, not ...
15 Apr 2023     Views:5808
Ambedkar Jayanti Celebrations...
14 Apr 2023     Views:6016
Supreme Court of India calls for Preventive Measur...
12 Apr 2023     Views:5580
Pursuing LL.M is not break in Law Practice, Rules ...
11 Apr 2023     Views:5800
Law should take into consideration realities of co...
10 Apr 2023     Views:5633
Delhi High Court said that peeping into public bat...
08 Apr 2023     Views:6231
Delhi High Court denies bails to AAP's Satyendra J...
06 Apr 2023     Views:6351
Supreme Court’s Triple Talaq Judgement Would App...
30 Jan 2023     Views:6079
Article 311(1) | An Order of Removal From Service ...
26 Jan 2023     Views:6557
Leaders shouldn't disrespect the President or Pri...
17 Jan 2023     Views:5861
New bench will hear Ashwini Upadhyay's Supreme Cou...
15 Jan 2023     Views:5997
Person Who Drove Rashly with the Knowledge that it...
12 Jan 2023     Views:6584
The rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot b...
11 Jan 2023     Views:6324
FIND A LAWYER




FIND A LAW SCHOOL



Most Read News Articles

  • Sabrimala Verdict (28 sept 2018) - A End of Taboo.
    On 07 Oct 2020    Views:96308
  • Case Analysis: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India
    On 11 Dec 2020    Views:73880
  • Case Analysis: THE BERUBARI UNION CASE
    On 14 Dec 2020    Views:71295
  • DOCTRINE OF ELECTION UNDER TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882
    On 08 Jul 2020    Views:70431
  • A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950 AIR 27, 1950 SCR 88)
    On 08 Nov 2020    Views:59794
View all >>

Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified

86540

Lawyers Network

103860

Users

630

Cities Serving

114

Law Schools Network

59824

Law Students Network

About us

  • Company Profile

Indian Major Laws

  • Indian Constitution
  • IPC
  • CrPC
  • CPC
  • Companies Act
  • Indian Evidence Act
  • CGST Act
  • Limitation Act

Policies

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Refund & Cancellation

    Ads & Media

  • Resource Sharing
  • Advertiser(Sign Up/Login)
  • Media

    Careers

  • Internships
  • Jobs
  • Student Journalists

    HELP & SUPPORT

  • Contact Us
  • Grievances
  • Test

News

  • Legal News
  • Post Article
  • Post Interview

Legal Library

  • Central Acts
  • Deeds Drafts [1128 ]
  • Legal Maxims

Connect

Lawsisto Direct

 

  •  
  •  
DISCLAIMER
Copyright © Lawsisto Private Limited. All rights reserved.
Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Lawsisto Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may
be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.