https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408825 Pre-execution challenge to a preventive detention order failed because delay in execution did not, on these facts, snap the live and proximate link between the alleged prejudicial activity and the detention purpose. The court reiterated that pre-execution interference is available only in limited circumstances, and delay alone is insufficient where non-execution is attributable to the proposed detenu. As the detenu and his family had earlier challenged the order and an interim restraint had operated for a substantial period, the later initiation of proceedings under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act was not treated as unexplained delay. The detention order was not quashed. en-us Sat, 19 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Jun 2021 13:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408825 Pre-execution challenge to a preventive detention order failed because delay in execution did not, on these facts, snap the live and proximate link between the alleged prejudicial activity and the detention purpose. The court reiterated that pre-execution interference is available only in limited circumstances, and delay alone is insufficient where non-execution is attributable to the proposed detenu. As the detenu and his family had earlier challenged the order and an interim restraint had operated for a substantial period, the later initiation of proceedings under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act was not treated as unexplained delay. The detention order was not quashed. Case-Laws Customs Sat, 19 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408825