https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159517 SC allowed the criminal appeal, holding the preventive detention order invalid and unconstitutional. The Court found that the detaining authority failed to explain a three-month delay in securing the detenu's arrest after the detention order, casting serious doubt on the genuineness of its subjective satisfaction and thereby vitiating the order. Further, the unexplained 72-day delay in disposing of the detenu's representation was held to be a violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution, as it was neither prompt nor expeditious and the explanation offered was unsatisfactory. Consequently, SC set aside the HC judgment, quashed the detention order, and directed the immediate release of the detenu. en-us Wed, 23 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Dec 2025 12:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159517 SC allowed the criminal appeal, holding the preventive detention order invalid and unconstitutional. The Court found that the detaining authority failed to explain a three-month delay in securing the detenu's arrest after the detention order, casting serious doubt on the genuineness of its subjective satisfaction and thereby vitiating the order. Further, the unexplained 72-day delay in disposing of the detenu's representation was held to be a violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution, as it was neither prompt nor expeditious and the explanation offered was unsatisfactory. Consequently, SC set aside the HC judgment, quashed the detention order, and directed the immediate release of the detenu. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 23 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159517