ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)

The preventive detention order passed by the second respondent dated 21.05.2024 is sought to be quashed in the present habeas corpus petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

3. Though several grounds are raised in the petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is an inordinate delay in passing the order of detention.

4. In the instant case, the detenu was arrested on 26.03.2024 and thereafter, the detention order came to be passed on 21.05.2024. This fact is not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. More-so, the detenu is in actual imprisonment under the preventive detention law for more than 07 months.

5. In the case of 'Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura', reported in '2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813', when there was an inordinate delay from the date of proposal till passing of the detention order and likewise, between the date of detention order and the actual arrest, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the live and proximate link, between the grounds and the purpose of detention, sta