Preventive detention delay breaks the live link: unexplained late service of the order rendered detention unsustainable.

An unexplained substantial delay in serving and executing a preventive detention order can break the live and proximate link required for preventive detention. Here, the order was made on 31 August 1989 but served only on 29 January 1990, and the claim that the detenu was absconding was rejected because no material showed continuous efforts to serve the order. The record also indicated that the authorities were still seeking bail extension before the Magistrate during the intervening period, showing the detenu was not beyond reach. The detention order was therefore held unsustainable and was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether a preventive detention order was liable to be quashed for inordinate delay in its service and execution.

Analysis: The detention order was made on 31 August 1989 but served only on 29 January 1990. The explanation that the detenu was absconding was not accepted because no material was produced to substantiate continuous efforts to serve the order. The record also showed that the customs authorities themselves sought extension of bail before the Magistrate during the interregnum, which indicated that the detenu was not beyond reach. Since a detention order is intended to prevent prejudicial activity in the near future, an unexplained and substantial delay in execution destroys its live link with the preventive purpose.

Conclusion: The delay in execution vitiated the detention order and the challenge succeeded.

Final Conclusion: The detention order was set aside and the detenu was directed to be released forthwith.

Ratio Decidendi: An unexplained substantial delay in serving and executing a preventive detention order, when not supported by material showing genuine inability to apprehend the detenu, breaks the live and proximate link required for preventive detention and renders the order unsustainable.

---