Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.19 seconds)The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Rajammal vs State Of Tamil Nadu And Another on 14 December, 1998
9. As per the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in above cited
Rajammal's case, number of days of delay is immaterial and what is to be
considered is whether the delay caused has been properly explained by the
authorities concerned. Here, 35 days delay has not been properly explained
at all.
Section 379 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Ummu Sabeena vs State Of Kerala & Ors on 17 November, 2011
10. Further, in a recent decision in Ummu Sabeena vs. State of
5/9
http://www.judis.nic.in
H.C.P.No.1628 of 2019
Kerala [2011 STPL (Web) 999 SC], the Supreme Court has held that the
history of personal liberty, as is well known, is a history of insistence on
procedural safeguards. The expression 'as soon as may be', in Article 22(5)
of the Constitution of India clearly shows the concern of the makers of the
Constitution that the representation, made on behalf of the detenu, should
be considered and disposed of with a sense of urgency and without any
avoidable delay.
1