Detention Order Quashed Due to Delays: COVID-19 Impact Dismissed

The court quashed the detention order due to unexplained delays in executing it, emphasizing the necessity for immediate detention. The petitioner's argument regarding the impact of COVID-19 on the necessity of the order was dismissed, as the court found the suspension of international flights did not invalidate the need for detention. The judgment highlighted the importance of prompt action in detention cases and ruled in favor of the petitioner's release.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Delay in passing the detention order.
2. Delay in executing the detention order.
3. Impact of COVID-19 on the necessity of the detention order.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Delay in Passing the Detention Order:

The petitioner challenged the detention order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, citing inordinate delay in its issuance. The petitioner was released on bail on November 6, 2019, but the detention order was passed on February 14, 2020, and executed on July 2, 2020. The petitioner argued that the delay lacked explanation, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in SMF Sultan Abdul Kader vs. Joint Secretary to Government of India.

The Detaining Authority justified the delay, stating that the proposal for detention was received on January 24, 2020, and the Central Screening Committee (CSC) held a meeting on February 5, 2020, leading to the issuance of the detention order on February 14, 2020. The court found the delay satisfactorily explained, referencing the Supreme Court's ruling in Union of India vs. Muneesh Suneja, which allows for delays if adequately justified.

2. Delay in Executing the Detention Order:

The petitioner contended that the delay in executing the detention order from February 14, 2020, to July 2, 2020, was undue and unexplained. The Detaining Authority argued that the petitioner was absconding, and all possible steps were taken to execute the order. The police made efforts on multiple dates, but the petitioner was not traceable. Proclamation under Section 7(1)(b) of the COFEPOSA Act was issued on June 8, 2020.

The court examined the efforts made by the police and found that there were gaps in the explanation, particularly between March 3, 2020, and June 8, 2020. The court cited the Supreme Court's decisions in Kadhar Naina Ushman vs. Union of India and K.P.M. Basheer vs. State of Karnataka, emphasizing that unexplained delays in execution create doubts about the genuineness of the detention order. The court concluded that the delay in execution was not satisfactorily explained, rendering the detention order vulnerable.

3. Impact of COVID-19 on the Necessity of the Detention Order:

The petitioner argued that the COVID-19 pandemic and the suspension of international flights rendered the detention order unnecessary. The court referred to the Circular dated August 31, 2020, issued by the Director General of Civil Aviation, which allowed international flights on selected routes. The court held that the temporary suspension of flights due to COVID-19 did not sever the live nexus between the petitioner's past conduct and the need for detention. The precautionary suspension of flights was not a valid ground to challenge the detention order.

Conclusion:

The court allowed the petition, quashed the detention order, and directed the release of the petitioner, citing the unexplained delay in executing the detention order as the primary reason. The judgment emphasized the need for a genuine and immediate necessity for detention, which was undermined by the delay in execution.

---