BALBIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the impugned detention order dated 16-2-2001 passed under the Conser?vation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act 1974. A large number of points have been taken in this writ petition, but it is not necessary to go into all of them since we are satisfied that this petition deserves to succeed on the very first point, namely, there was unreasonable delay in executing the detention order.

(2.) Sri A.D. Giri, learned Senior Advocate, has pointed out that there are two periods of delay in executing the detention order which have not been explained. Firstly, the period from 16-2-2001, when the impugned detention order was passed, to 10-4-2001 when a stay order was passed in Writ Petition No. 2068 of 2001 i.e. a delay of about 55 days which has not been explained. Secondly he pointed out that the delay from 7-12-2001 when the aforesaid Writ Petition was dismissed till 12-1-2002 when the petitioner was arrested i.e. a period of about 35 days has also not been explained.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that this point has not been taken in the writ petition. But we do not agree with the submission. In ground (J) of the writ petition it has been clearly stated that the detention order was passed on 16-2-2001 and the stay order was passed on 10-4-2001 in Writ Petition No.2068 of 2001 and during this period the petitioner was attending to his regular business duties and hence this period during which the detention order was not executed has not been explained. It is further stated in paragraph 2 of the writ petition that there is further delay of 5 weeks from 7-12-2001 when the earlier Writ Petition No. 2068 of 2001 was dismissed till 12-1-2002 when the petitioner was arrested. It is also stated at the end of paragraph 3(k) of the writ petition that there is delay in executing the detention order. In grounds (H) and (J) of writ petition there is clear averment regarding the delay in executing the detention order relating to the second period i.e. after the dismissal of Writ Petition No.2068 of 2001, whereas in ground (J) the averment is regarding the first period i.e. from 16-2-2001 when the detention order was passed to 10-4-2001 when the stay order was passed in Writ Petition No.2068 of 2001.