Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.03 seconds)Kadek Dwi Ani Rasmini vs K. Natarajan on 6 August, 2021
24.In a judgement reported in 2019 (1) CTC 385 (Kadek Dwi Ani
Rasmini Vs. K.Natrajan, Inspector of Police), a learned Single Judge was
pleased to award compensation for the infringement of personal liberty and
reputation of a victim who was erroneously implicated under the provisions
of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act 1956. In the present case, the writ
petitioner has been falsely implicated under the provisions of Immoral
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
17/21
W.P(MD).No.2584 of 2016
Traffic (Prevention) Act 1956 and she was arrested and remanded at 9.30 p.m.
She was detained in a detention home for a period of 13 days. Later in an
enquiry conducted by a higher police official, it was found that a false case
has been lodged against her and based upon the report, this Court quashed the
charge sheet.
Alarmelu Mangai vs The Secretary To The Government Of Tamil ... on 27 April, 2010
23.The learned Single Judge of our High Court in a judgement reported
in (2010) 8 MLJ 647 ( Alarmelu Mangai Vs. Secretary to the Government
of Tamil Nadu) has held that the State is liable to pay compensation to the
victim for infringement of right to privacy and public humiliation meted out
to her by the action of the police authorities in entering into the house at
midnight and forcibly taking away to the police station. The learned Single
Judge was pleased to award Rs.5 lakhs as compensation.
Section 164 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) vs Union Of India on 26 September, 2018
22.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgement reported in (2017) 10
SCC Page 1 ( K.S.Puttaswamy Vs. Union of India) has held that right to
privacy is a basic fundamental right and it forms an intrinsic part of Article 21
and freedoms guarantee in Pt.III in Constitution of India.
Shri D.K. Basu,Ashok K. Johri vs State Of West Bengal,State Of U.P on 18 December, 1996
9.The learned counsel for the petitioner had relied upon the judgement
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (1997) 1 SCC 416 (D.K.Basu Vs.
State of West Bengal), the judgements of our High Court reported in (2010)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9/21
W.P(MD).No.2584 of 2016
8 MLJ 647 (Alarmelu Mangai Vs Secretary to the Government of Tamil
Nadu), 2019 (1) CTC 385 (Kadek Dwi Ani Rasmini Vs. K.Natrajan,
Inspector of Police) and the order made in W.P.No.2227 of 2012 dated
01.02.022 (Nallakaman (deceased) and another Vs. The Government of
Tamil and others) to contend that where the police authorities have violated
personal liberty and the reputation of the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled
to receive compensation.
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
1