https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42959 Unexplained and substantial delay in passing a preventive detention order can vitiate the detention where prompt action is required to address a proximate apprehension of prejudicial activity. The High Court noted that the alleged smuggling incident occurred in March 1989, but the detention order was issued only on 30 November 1989, with no satisfactory explanation for the lapse of about 81/2 months. As the material was already available at an earlier stage, the delay broke the necessary proximate link between the incident and the detention power. The detention order was quashed and the detenu was directed to be released forthwith. en-us Thu, 19 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:45:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42959 Unexplained and substantial delay in passing a preventive detention order can vitiate the detention where prompt action is required to address a proximate apprehension of prejudicial activity. The High Court noted that the alleged smuggling incident occurred in March 1989, but the detention order was issued only on 30 November 1989, with no satisfactory explanation for the lapse of about 81/2 months. As the material was already available at an earlier stage, the delay broke the necessary proximate link between the incident and the detention power. The detention order was quashed and the detenu was directed to be released forthwith. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 19 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42959