Writ Petition No. 3172 of 2005 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. We have noted that the order of detention was challenged Writ Petition (Criminal) No.342 2005 before Apex Court petition withdrawn 16/12/2005 enable petitioner court. In detention 21/9/2005 clarified detenu representation Detaining Authority State Government Central Government. Undoubtedly, representation required considered respective authorities scheme Section…
Judgment
Heard Mr. Warunjikar with Mr. Rohira, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.Mhaispurkar, the learned APP for State.
The detenu Vipul Purshottam Gor, who is the brother petitioner, detained Section 3(1) Conservation Foreign Exchange Prevention Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 Competent Authority
21/9/2005 challenged Criminal Writ Petition No.3172 2005 admitted hearing 6th March, 2006 peremptorily. Pending petition, the applicant prays for being released the detenu on bail by this application.
It is submitted that an application under :2: Section 127B Customs Act 1962 admitted Settlement Commission 6/10/2005 deposit required amount, released. Reliance placed Section 127H Customs Act, regarding immunity action. support application Mr. Warunjikar 1962 In submitted seized 27th January, 2005 detention passed almost months particularly detenu application Section 127B Customs Act, 1962 before the Settlement Commission on or about 12/8/2005.
We have noted that the order of detention was challenged Writ Petition (Criminal) No.342 2005 before Apex Court petition withdrawn 16/12/2005 enable petitioner court. In detention 21/9/2005 clarified detenu representation Detaining Authority State Government Central Government. Undoubtedly, representation required considered respective authorities scheme Section 11 Conservation Foreign Exchange Prevention :3: Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 whether detention examine revoked. Admittedly, today, Section 127H Customs Act, 1962 passed favour detenu proceedings initiated Section 127B Customs Act admitted Settlement Commissioner. Even otherwise grounds raised representation submitted i.e. are, detenu authorities concerned Detaining Authority State Government Central Government case may be. We therefore, inclined entertain application stage, Criminal Writ Petition No.3172 of 2005 has been already fixed for final hearing on 6th March, 2006 peremptorily.
The application is, therefore, rejected. In detenu submits representation within period granted detention order, direct representation considered decided a concerned authority within a period of three weeks from its receipt, on its own merits. Dalvi,J.) (Smt.R.S. Dalvi,J.) (Smt.R.S. Dalvi,J.) (Smt.R.S. Marlapalle, J.) (B.H. Marlapalle, J.) (B.H. Marlapalle, J.) (B.H.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.