Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.19 seconds)Amir Sadruddin Khan vs Administrator, Union Territory Of ... on 25 September, 1991
(3) The petitioner has challenged the said detention order on variousgrounds, but stress has been laid on the point that though the date of incident was 19-5-1992, but no detention order was passed till 8-10-1992. This long and undue delay in passing the detention order has snapped the nexus between the activity alleged and the activity sought to be curbed by passing the impugned detention order and on this ground it has been alleged that the said detention order is illegal and void and the Detaining Authority had not applied its mind to the facts of the case before passing the said detention order.According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the delay in passing the detention order shows that the detention was unnecessary and the delay has vitiated the same. It is submitted that there was non application of mind on the part of the Detaining Authority. Learned Counsel further submitted that even thereafter the order of detention was not served upon the petitioner till6-11-1992. Reliance has been placed on a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Amit Sadruddin Khan v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi & Ors. Criminal Writ Petition No. 136 of 1991-decidedon 25-9-1991 in support of the contention that in such circumstances whent he detention order has been passed after a long delay and the service was also effected after delay the detention order is liable to be quashed.
1