1985 (2) TMI 145

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... from abetting smuggling of goods namely wrist watches and integrated circuits. He challenges his detention and continued detention on diverse grounds. In the view we are going to take, that it is sufficient to mention only one of those grounds. This ground" is that the detention becomes void and vitiated, inter alia, on account of non-compliance with -the mandatory provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the aforesaid Act. 2. The relevant facts, for the above contention are these. The Administrator of the Union Territory of Delhi, agreeing with the proposal to preventively detail the petitioner under the aforesaid Act passed an order to the effect that he be so detained, on November 23, 1984. The formal order duly authenticated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, contests this proposition. His first contention is that the making of the order contemplated by section 3(2) of the Act, is really with regard to the order which formally comes into existence after the Administrator accepts the proposal for detention and agrees to the detention of a person; We cannot accept this contention. The drawing up a formal order is something quite different from making of an order. The making of the order and drawing up a formal order cannot be regarded as one and the same thing. A reading of Section 3(1) and Section 12A of the Act would be of some advantage. Section 3(1) lays down the purposes for which and the circumstances in which alone the Central Government or the State Government of an Officer may make an ....