JITENDRAKUMAR DHANJIBHAI ROKAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned advocate Mr. Harsheel Shukla waives service of notice of rule for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for respondent No.4. With the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing today.

(2.) By way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenge detention order dated 2.8.2019 bearing F No.PD-12002/17/2019- COFEPOSA annexed at Annexure A.

(3.) As such, the impugned order of detention is challenged on various grounds, but at the end of the arguments, the Court noticed that there is no nexus or live link between the alleged illegal activity and purported claim of the detaining authority, as the alleged illegal activity had been committed between January, 2014 and July, 2015 while the impugned order has been passed on 2.8.2019. At this juncture, it is relevant to reproduce ground Xli.