HARIDAS AMARCHAND SHAH OF BOMBAY versus K.L. VERMA & ORS.

Citation: [1988] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 1031 · Decided: 09-12-1988 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.C. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

\ 
'\ 
HARIDAS AMARCHAND SHAH OF BOMBAY 
v. 
K.L. VERMA & ORS. 
DECEMBER 9, 1988 
A 
[B.C. RAY AND K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, JJ.) 
B 
Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling 
Activities Act, 1974: Section 3-Detenticm order.;._Detenu contending 
that failure to furnish bank pass books vitiated the detention order-
Held that bank pass books were not vital and material documems in 
reaching subjective satisfaction of detaining authority-Detention order C 
held valid. 
The house of the appellant-detenu was searched and currency 
notes, hank drafts, bank pass-books and loose sheets seized. The 
detenu's statement was recorded and he was arrested. Later, he made 
an application retracting his statement and the Magistrate made an D 
order thereon: "Taken on record". He was subsequently released on 
bail with a condition that he would attend Enforcement Department 
Office every day. On his moving another application, the condition was 
'> 
varied. 
Thereafter, an order of detention was made by respondent No. I 
E 
against the appellant under s. 3 of the Conservation of Foreign 
Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The 
detenu thereupon filed a writ In the High Court challenging the order, 
which was dismissed. 
Before this Court, it was contended on behalf of the detenu that (I) 
F 
his application for variation of the condition of bail and the order 
thereon as well as his application retracting his statement and the order 
thereon were not placed before the Detaining Authority, and non· 
consideration of these vital documents vitiated the detention order; and 
(ii) copies of bank statements and loose sheets were not supplied to the 
detenu and this infringed his right to make an effective representation. 
G 
Dismissing the appeal, it was, , 
HELD: I. The application for variation of condition of ball and 
the order .passed thereon were not material or relevant documents and 
failure to produce the same before the Detaining Authority before H 
1031 
1032 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1988] Supp. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
arriving at his subjective satisfaction had not vitiated the detention 
order. [1035A] 
B 
Asha Devi wife of Copa/ Sherwal Mehta (detenu) v. Shiveraj, 
Addi. Chief Secretary to the Government of Gujarat & Anr., [1979] 2 
S.C.R. 215, referred to. 
Arvindbhai Purshottambhai Patel v. R.O. Iyer and Ors., Writ 
Petition No. 1304 of 1987 dated 25.2.1988, Bombay High Court, 
distinguished. 
2. Though the detenu's application retracting his statement and 
C the Magistrate's order thereon was not placed before the Detaining 
Authority; his retraction Jetter and the reply of the Directorate of 
Enforcement had been placed before the Detaining Authority, and as 
such ihe Authority knew about these facts. [103SG; 10~6A] 
3. There was no dispute that all the documents which were con-
0 
sidered by the Detaining Authority in reaching his subjective satisfac-
tion and referred to in the grounds of detention had been furnished to 
the detenu. It was not necessary to furnish copies of all the documents 
including the bank pass hooks which were not material and relevant for 
reaching the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority merely 
because they were mentioned in the panchnama. ll036F-G] 
E 
f' 
4. The bank pass books were not vital and material documents in 
reaching subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority and as such 
the failure to furnish the bank pass books to the detenu had not 
infringed any right of the appellant and the order of detention could not 
be questioned as illegal or vitiated on that account. [10378-C] 
. Ashok Kumar v. Union of India, [1988] 1Scale194,_referred to. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal 
No. 627 of 1988. 
G 
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.6.1988 of the Bombay 
High Court in Criininal Writ Petition No. 257 of 1988. 
R.K. Garg and P.N. Gupta for the Appellant. 
Kuldip Singh, Additional Solicitor General, Arnn Madan and P. 
H 
Parmeshwaran for the Respondents. 
! 
J 
,.;;: - - -
H.A. SHAH v. K.L. VERMA [RAY, J.] 
)033 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
RAY, J. Special leave granted. Arguments heard. 
This appeal on special leave is against the judgment dated 10th 
June, 1988 made by High Court of Allahabad dismissing Criminal Writ 
A 
Petition No. 257 of 1988 instituted by the detenu. 
B 
The facts giving rise to this appeal are that on August 25, 1987 
the house of the appellant was searched by the officers of the Enfor
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.