JOYI KITTY JOSEPH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 3 S.C.R. 419 · Decided: 05-03-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUDHANSHU DHULIA, K. VINOD CHANDRAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 3 S.C.R. 419 : 2025 INSC 327
Joyi Kitty Joseph 
v. 
Union of India & Ors.
(Criminal Appeal No.1180 of 2025)
06 March 2025
[Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
The wife of the detenu; detained under the provisions of the 
Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling 
Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA Act) is challenging the order of 
detention.
Headnotes†
Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of 
Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 – Detenu was detained under 
the provisions of the COFEPOSA Act – It was contended that 
there was non-application of mind since the allegations were 
raised under clauses (i) to (iv) of s.3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act, 
in an omnibus manner, revealing the bias of the detaining 
officer – It was further contended that the attempt was to 
somehow obtain preventive detention of the person who was 
arrested on the basis of the offences alleged; in which crime 
he was granted bail by the jurisdictional Court, imposing very 
stringent conditions:
Held: In the instant case, the facts reveal that the detenu has not 
only been involved in smuggling of goods, but also has abetted 
such smuggling of goods through carriers, engaged in receiving 
the same, dispatching it to middle-men for keeping it concealed 
in their premises and effecting sale through them; who were paid 
a commission – This definitely brings in the ingredients of each of 
the clauses under (i) to (iv) of s.3(1) – The jurisdictional Magistrate 
released the detenu on bail vide order dated 16.04.2024 on certain 
conditions – The specific ground raised by the prosecution of 
apprehension of involvement in similar type of smuggling activity 
was reckoned by the jurisdictional Magistrate while granting bail 
and imposing conditions to prevent the detenu from engaging 
420
[2025] 3 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
in such smuggling activities – However, nothing is stated by the 
detaining authority as to why the conditions are not sufficient to 
prevent the detenu from engaging in further activities of smuggling; 
which was the specific ground on which the conditions were 
imposed while granting bail – It was for the detaining authority to 
look into the conditions imposed by the Magistrate and enter into 
a subjective satisfaction as to whether the same was sufficient to 
avoid a preventive detention or otherwise, insufficient to restrain 
him from further involvement in similar smuggling activities – 
The criminal prosecution launched and the preventive detention 
ordered are on the very same allegations of organised smuggling 
activities – The detaining authority ought to have examined the 
bail conditions – Whether they were sufficient to curb the evil of 
further indulgence in identical activities; which is the very basis of 
the preventive detention ordered – Since detention order is silent 
on that aspect, the detention order is interfered with – Hence, the 
order of detention is set aside – The detenu directed to be released 
forthwith. [Paras 7, 14, 15, 19, 20, 22]
Case Law Cited
Rameshwar Lal Patwari v. State of Bihar [1968] 2 SCR 505 : AIR 
1968 SC 1303; Vijay Narain Singh v. State of Bihar [1984] 3 SCR 
435 : (1984) 3 SCC 14 – relied on.
Narendra Purshotam Umrao v. B.B. Gujral [1979] 2 SCR 315 : 
(1979) 2 SCC 637; Khaja Bilal Ahmed v. State of Telangana [2019] 
18 SCR 1174 : (2020) 13 SCC 632; Ameena Begum v. State of 
Telangana and Others (2023) 9 SCC 587; Rekha v. State of T.N. 
[2011] 4 SCR 740 : (2011) 5 SCC 244; Haradhan Saha v. State 
of W.B. [1975] 1 SCR 778 : (1975) 3 SCC 198 – referred to.
List of Acts
Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling 
Activities Act, 1974; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances 
Act, 1985; Customs Act, 1962; Constitution of India.
List of Keywords
Detenu; Preventive detention; Bail; Bail conditions; Smuggling; 
Section 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act; Reasonableness of 
consideration; Subjective satisfaction; Judicial Review; Detaining 
authority; Liberty.
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 
421
Joyi Kitty Joseph v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
1180 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.10.2024 of the High Court 
of Delhi at New Delhi in WPCRL No. 1901 of 2024
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Farook M. Razack, Sr. Adv., Faisal Farook, Shubail Farook, Kshitij 
Kumar, Sharad Kumar Puri, Mrs. Priya Puri.
Advs. for the Respondents:
Vikramjit Banerjee, A
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.