@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
V.K. Jhanji, J.@mdashThe present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been preferred by
Gurvinder Singh @ Toni for quashing of detention order dated 3.6.1993, Annexure P-1, passed u/s 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign,.
Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (in short, the Act).
2. On 3.2.1992 at Raja Sansi Airport, passenger namely Manwinder Singh son of Santokh Singh was found having in his possession 3 pieces of
gold, 20 Kgs. Almond and 21 packets of cigarettes. He failed to produce any evidence for the lawful importation/possession/acquisition of these
items. In his statements dated 3.2.1992 and 5.2.1992 recorded u/s 108 of the Customs Act, he stated that his brother; Gurvinder Singh @ Toni,
i.e. petitioner, who is running a travel agency in the name and style of Preet Travel Agency situated in Landa Bazar, Amritsar has been financing
him to bring goods from Kabul. The residential premises of the petitioner were searched on 4.2.1992, but nothing incriminating was recovered.
Petitioner was asked to appear before the Customs Authorities, but instead of appearing, he obtained an anticipatory bail. It was only after he
obtained the anticipatory bail, that he gave his statement u/s 108 of the Customs Act. In his statement, he denied having any links with his brother.
The order of detention was passed on 3.6.1993, i.e. almost a year and four months after the date of pre-judicial activity. The order of detention
has been sought to be quashed in this petition on the ground of delay in passing of the detention order, as also on the ground of delay in executing
the same. It has been alleged in the petition that order of detention was executed on the petitioner on 12.6.1994, i.e. after a delay of nearly one
year. During the course of arguments, on 2.11.1994, this Court found that there is no adequate explanation furnished by the detaining Authority as
to why the detention order was not executed for nearly a year. Accordingly, Mr. Bhanto, DAG Punjab, was asked to file a supplementary affidavit
in this regard on or before 2.12.1994. When the matter came up before me on 22.12.1994. Mr. Bhanot prayed for an adjournment and
consequently, the case was adjourned to 12.12.1994. Today, when the matter has been taken up again, Mr. Bhanot has stated that in spite of his
having requested the department to file the supplementary affidavit, no one has come forward for filing the supplementary affidavit so as to explain
the delay in executing the order of detention. Though opportunity was given to the State Government to defend their action, but they have failed to
do so despite the grant of repeated adjournments. Therefore, in absence of any explanation regarding delay in executing the order of detention, I
have no alternative but to hold that the further detention of the petitioner is unconstitutional and the petition deserves to be allowed.
3. Accordingly, this petition shall stand allowed and the detention order dated 3.6.193 is quashed. It is ordered that petitioner shall be set at liberty
forthwith provided no other case is pending against him.
