TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elf by passage of time or that the said order of detention has been rendered stale with passage of time - challenge levied against the impugned preventive detention order under COFEPOSA Act is unsustainable, though it is yet to be executed - petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - WP (C). No. 31214 of 2016 (B) - - - Dated:- 15-11-2016 - Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan And Devan Ramachandran, JJ. Petitioner: P. K. Ravisankar, S. Jamal Respondents: S. Manu, K. V. Sohan, M. S. Breez JUDGMENT Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. A preventive detention order issued under Conservation of Foreign and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 is challenged at the pre-execution stage, purportedly on behalf of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the plea that the two grounds mentioned as available to the petitioner from Alka Subhash Gadia (supra) are not applicable to the case in hand. 5. An occurrence was detected on 9.11.2013 by the Officers, enforcing provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and other relevant statutes. Certain persons were arrested. On 13.11.2013, there was a search in the residential premises of the petitioner, in India. The sponsoring authority's recommendation was received by the detaining authority on 7.1.2014. The detention order was issued on 15.3.2014. The fact of the matter remains that the detention order was not enforced evidently, because the petitioner remains out of India. 6. As noted in Dave-II (supra), the legislature was conscious of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld paralyse or impair authority to defend existence of our society, and to reject as false claims in the name of security which would undermine our freedoms and open the way to oppression . 8. Bearing the aforesaid in mind and also taking a cue from the fact that the grounds of detention would always relate to different components attributed to the conduct of the proposed detenu, we see that the specious argument that the live link is lost from the date of the so-called detection on 9.11.2013 or from 13.11.2013, i.e., the date of search, does not hold good. We say this because, the mere fact that the detaining authority took around 1 months to conclude on the request of the sponsoring authority would not by itself deprive the potency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
