Shri Satbir Singh, S/O Late Ajit ... vs Union Of India (Uoi), Through The ...
2002 Latest Caselaw 440 Del

JUDGMENT

Madan B. Lokur, J.

1. We heard this case along with CW 4786/1996 (Ajit Singh (dead) v. Union of India & Ors). The broad facts of the case have been mentioned in our decision rendered in that case and are not being repeated here.

2. The Petitioner was preventively detained under the provisions of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short COFEPOSA). His appeal was heard by the Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal). The Tribunal consisted of a Chairman who was a retired Judge of the High Court and two members. By an order dated 7th May, 1997, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Petitioner.

3. The various grounds urged by learned counsel in the connected case of Ajit Singh are not applicable so far as this case is concerned.

4. On merits, we are of the view that since the Petitioner himself was preventively detained under the provisions of COFEPOSA, the burden is on him to show that

the property sought to be forfeited was acquired by him from sources other than through illegal activities.

5. The Tribunal has gone into the entire facts of the case and has concluded that the appeal requires to be partly allowed. The Petitioner was not able to successfully rebut the presumption and onus placed on him. Learned counsel for the Petitioner did not make any submission challenging the findings of the Tribunal as indeed he could not because they are all findings of fact arrived at by the Tribunal. No perversity in the order passed by the Tribunal has been alleged by learned counsel.

6. We see no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal dated 7th May, 1997. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

7. No costs.