Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 270 (0.82 seconds)
Documents citing Kanu Sanyal vs District Magistrate, Darjeeijng & Ors on 11 September, 1973

Smt. Jayanti And Another vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 6 October, 2021

Eventually, the Bench ruled thus: (Kanu Sanyal case, SCC p. 148, para 5) ''5. ... The production of the petitioner before the Special Judge, Visakhapatnam, could not, therefore, be said to be illegal and his subsequent detention in the Central Jail, Visakhapatnam, pursuant to the orders made by the Special Judge, Visakhapatnam, pending trial must be held to be valid.
Allahabad High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 1 - Y K Srivastava - Full Document

P.Pushpavathy vs Ministry Of External Affairs on 27 June, 2013

9. Admittedly, the Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by the petitioner on 11.05.2009, nearly after two months from 20.03.2009. In the Habeas Corpus Petitions, the date of filing of the petitioners, the date of return and the date of hearing of the petitions are more relevant to decide as to whether the detention of the detenu is legal or illegal. We are of the opinion that for deciding the issue, the date of filing of the petition, the date of return and the date of hearing of the petition would be relevant and our view is fortified by the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1974 Supreme Court 510, decided by His Lordships, Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.N.Bhagwati and Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.K.Goswami (Kanu Sanyal vs. District Magistrate, Darjeeling and others) and the relevant portion of the judgment reads as follows:
Madras High Court Cites 82 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Yajur Verma @Jai Verma vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 1 February, 2024

"44. The present appeal emanates from a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus for the production and custody of a minor child. This Court in Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling [Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling, (1973) 2 SCC 674 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 980] , has held that habeas corpus was essentially a procedural writ dealing with machinery of justice. The object underlying the writ was to secure the release of a person who is illegally deprived of his liberty. The writ of habeas corpus is a command addressed to the person who is alleged to have another in unlawful custody, requiring him to produce the body of such person before the court. On production of the person before the court, the circumstances in which the custody of the person concerned has been detained can be inquired into by the court and upon due inquiry into the alleged unlawful restraint pass appropriate direction as may be deemed just and proper. The High Court in such proceedings conducts an inquiry for immediate determination of the right of the person's freedom and his release when the detention is found to be unlawful."
Allahabad High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sara Bhayaraju vs State Of Telangana on 13 December, 2024

This Court in Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling [Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling, (1973) 2 SCC 674 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 980] , has held that habeas corpus was essentially a procedural writ dealing with machinery of justice. The object underlying the writ was to secure the release of a person who is illegally deprived of his liberty. The writ of habeas corpus is a command addressed to the person who is alleged to have another in unlawful custody, requiring him to produce the body of such person before the court. On production of the person before the court, the circumstances in which the custody of the person concerned has been detained can be inquired into by the court and upon due inquiry into the alleged unlawful restraint pass appropriate direction as may be deemed Page 18 of 49 PSK,J & NTR,J wp_21751_2024 just and proper. The High Court in such proceedings conducts an inquiry for immediate determination of the right of the person's freedom and his release when the detention is found to be unlawful.
Telangana High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - P S Koshy - Full Document

New Born Baby Of Gurmeet Kaur Thru. ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, ... on 25 May, 2024

"44. The present appeal emanates from a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus for the production and custody of a minor child. This Court in Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling [Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling, (1973) 2 SCC 674 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 980] , has held that habeas corpus was essentially a procedural writ dealing with machinery of justice. The object underlying the writ was to secure the release of a person who is illegally deprived of his liberty. The writ of habeas corpus is a command addressed to the person who is alleged to have another in unlawful custody, requiring him to produce the body of such person before the court. On production of the person before the court, the circumstances in which the custody of the person concerned has been detained can be inquired into by the court and upon due inquiry into the alleged unlawful restraint pass appropriate direction as may be deemed just and proper. The High Court in such proceedings conducts an inquiry for immediate determination of the right of the person's freedom and his release when the detention is found to be unlawful.
Allahabad High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Seema And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 14 June, 2024

"44. The present appeal emanates from a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus for the production and custody of a minor child. This Court in Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling [Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling, (1973) 2 SCC 674 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 980] , has held that habeas corpus was essentially a procedural writ dealing with machinery of justice. The object underlying the writ was to secure the release of a person who is illegally deprived of his liberty. The writ of habeas corpus is a command addressed to the person who is alleged to have another in unlawful custody, requiring him to produce the body of such person before the court. On production of the person before the court, the circumstances in which the custody of the person concerned has been detained can be inquired into by the court and upon due inquiry into the alleged unlawful restraint pass appropriate direction as may be deemed just and proper. The High Court in such proceedings conducts an inquiry for immediate determination of the right of the person's freedom and his release when the detention is found to be unlawful.
Allahabad High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - S Lavania - Full Document

Vedika Dwivedi Thru. Her Mother Priya ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 12 November, 2024

"44. The present appeal emanates from a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus for the production and custody of a minor child. This Court in Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling [Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling, (1973) 2 SCC 674 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 980] , has held that habeas corpus was essentially a procedural writ dealing with machinery of justice. The object underlying the writ was to secure the release of a person who is illegally deprived of his liberty. The writ of habeas corpus is a command addressed to the person who is alleged to have another in unlawful custody, requiring him to produce the body of such person before the court. On production of the person before the court, the circumstances in which the custody of the person concerned has been detained can be inquired into by the court and upon due inquiry into the alleged unlawful restraint pass appropriate direction as may be deemed just and proper. The High Court in such proceedings conducts an inquiry for immediate determination of the right of the person's freedom and his release when the detention is found to be unlawful.
Allahabad High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - S Lavania - Full Document

Vatsalyapuram Jain Welfare Society ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 January, 2024

In Kanu Sanyal vs. District Magistrate, Darjeeling & Ors. (supra), while dealing with writ of habeas corpus, the Supreme Court has held that it is essentially a procedural writ. It deals with the machinery of justice and not the substantive law. The object of the writ is to secure release of a person, who is illegally restrained of his/her liberty.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - S A Dharmadhikari - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next