9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (9) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th August, 1972 made by the District Magistrate, Burdwan under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971. There are several grounds taken in the petition for challenging the validity of the order of detention, but it is not necessary to refer to them since we find that there is one ground which is sufficient to dispose of the petition. To appreciate this ground it is necessary to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h August, 1972, and even after the order of detention was made, the petitioner was not arrested until 22nd February, 1973. There was thus delay at both stages and this delay, unless satisfactorily explained, would throw considerable doubt on the genuineness of the Subjective satisfaction of the District Magistrate, Burdwan recited in the order of detention. It would be reasonable to assume that if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Each case must depend on its own peculiar facts and circumstances. The detaining authority may have a reasonable explanation for the delay and that might be sufficient to dispel the inference that its satisfaction was not genuine. But here we find that though an affidavit in reply to the petition was filed by the Deputy Secretary Home (Special) Department, Government of West Bengal, no explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority in making its return to the rule in such a case to place all the relevant facts before the Court and if there is any delay in making the order of detention or in arresting the detenu which is prima facie unreasonable, the State must give reasons explaining the delay. Here there is no explanation for the delay which has occurred at both stages and in the absence of such explanation, we are no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
