Court refrains from addressing conflicting claims on preventive detention, directs Appellant appearance after 15 years.

The court refrained from addressing conflicting claims regarding preventive detention at the pre-execution stage dating back to 1991. The Appellant was directed to appear for the order to be served after over 15 years, with instructions for the Respondents not to take coercive steps for 10 days post-service. The court condoned the delay in filing the application, restored the appeal, and directed the service of the order on a specified date. The Appellant was advised to utilize available remedies. The appeal and related application were disposed of accordingly.

---

---

Issues involved: Challenge to preventive detention at the pre-execution stage, delay in filing the application.

Challenge to preventive detention: The appeal concerns a challenge to preventive detention at the pre-execution stage dating back to 1991. The Respondents claimed that the detention order could not be executed due to the Appellant's alleged methods to evade service. The Appellant denied adopting any such methods. The court refrained from delving into these conflicting claims at this stage. The Appellant was directed to appear before the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, for the order to be served after over 15 years. The Respondents were instructed not to take coercive steps against the Appellant for 10 days following the service of the order.

Delay in filing the application: The court condoned the delay in filing the application and restored the appeal, which was previously dismissed, to its original number. The Appellant's presence in court led to directions for the service of the order, along with reasons and other documents, on a specified date. The court emphasized that the Appellant should take advantage of any available remedies. The appeal and related criminal miscellaneous application were disposed of accordingly.

---