Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.21 seconds)Pesala Nookaraju vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 16 August, 2023
[2023 SCC online SC 1003] In
Pesala Nookaraju v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh and
others, a three Judges Bench of the Apex Court has considered the
provisions of Section 12 of the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of
W.P. (Crl). No.712 of 2023
3
Dangerous Activities of Boot-leggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders,
Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986
as also Articles 22(4) and 22(5) of the Constitution of India and held
that if any period is specified in the confirmatory order, then, the
period of detention would be up to such period, if no period is
specified, then it would be for a maximum period of 12 months from
the date of detention.
Section 12 in Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 [Entire Act]
Vijaya Kumar Gujral vs Union Of India And Others on 27 May, 1987
5. The Apex Court in Vijaya Kumar v. Union of India and
others [1988 KHC 924] had also considered a similar provision
contained in the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention
of Smuggling Activities Act and had held as follows:
Section 11 in Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 [Entire Act]
The Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974
Fagu Shaw, Etc., Etc vs The State Of West Bengal on 20 December, 1973
In Fagu Shaw and others v. State of W. B. (supra) also, it was
held that where a maximum period of detention is prescribed by the
statute and the detention is limited to the maximum period as
prescribed, the mere fact that the reason for continuing the
detention for the maximum period is not stated in the order would
not invalidate the order.
Section 8 in Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 [Entire Act]
1