Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.45 seconds)
Shri Harish Chawla vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 7 September, 1998 cites

Rajendrakumar Natvarlal Shah vs State Of Gujarat & Ors on 10 May, 1988

Para 10. Viewed from this perspective, we with to emphasis and make it clear for the guidance of the different High Courts that a distinction must be drawn between the delay in making of an order of detention under a law relating to preventive detention like the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 and the delay in complying with the procedural safeguards of Article 22(5) of the Constitution. It has been laid down by this Court in a series of decisions that the rule as to unexplained delay in taking action is not inflexible. Quite obviously in cases of mere delay in making of an order of detention under a law like the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 enacted for the purpose of dealing effectively with persons engaged in smuggling and foreign exchange racketeering who, owing to their large resources and influence have been posing a serious threat to the economy and thereby to the security of the nation. Courts should not merely on account of delay in making of an order of detention assume that such delay if not satisfactorily explained, must necessarily give rise to an inference that there was no sufficient material for the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority or that such subjective satisfaction was not genuinely reached. Taking of such a view would not be warranted unless the Court finds that the grounds are stale or illusory or that there is no real nexus between the grounds and the dates of the alleged incidents and the making of the order of detention was not so large that it would be said that no reasonable person could possibly have arrived at the satisfaction which the District Magistrate did on the basis of the alleged incidents. It follows that the test of proximity is not a rigid or mechanical test to be blindly applied by merely counting the number of months between the offending acts and the order of detention.
Supreme Court of India Cites 28 - Cited by 83 - A P Sen - Full Document
1   2 Next