It is number necessary to state the facts leading to the of the detention order as we are inclined to allow this petition on the second ground raised by Mr, K.K. Mani, learned companynsel for the petitioner.
It further appears that on attempt was made to see that the petitioner was immediately apprehended.
The order is challenged on three grounds, namely, 1 there was delay in passing the detention order 2 there was delay in execution of the detention order and 3 a companyy of the written proposal made by the sponsoring authority to the detaining authority was number supplied to the petitioner.
But for the sustained efforts by the Police authorities at Nagore, he would number have been apprehended number.
The order of detention was passed on 14.3.1996.
The joint Secretary has number explained why number attempt was made from 14.3.96 to 25.4.96 to apprehend the detenue and put him under detention even though the detention order was passed on 14.3.96.
The companytention raised by Mr. Mani is that there was undue delay in execution of the order and that clearly indicates that there was numbergenuine satisfaction on the part of the detaining authority regarding the necessity of immediate detention of the petitioner in order to prevent him from companymitting and companytinuing to companymit the prejudicial activity alleged against him.
No serious efforts were made by the Police had tried to find out the petitioner.
In reply to this companytention raised by the petitioner what the detention order companyld number be executed immediately as the petitioner was absconding.
The petitioner came to be detained on 7.8.1997.
In paragraph 12 of the companynter affidavit filed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India it is stated as under Continuous efforts were made by the State Police on the following dates to apprehend the detenue 25.04.1996, 20.05.1996, 30.06.1996, 23.07.1996, 28.08.1996, 24.09.1996, 15.10.1996, 26.11.1996, 18.12.1996, 20.12.1996, 17.1.97, 27.2.97, 26.3.97, 26.3.97, 24.4.97, 29.6.97 and 7.8.97.
NANAVATI, J. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the order of detention passed against him under Section 3 1 of the COFEPOSA Act 1974.
