Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23 (0.41 seconds)Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 18 in Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 [Entire Act]
Article 358 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
V.R. Ramakrishnan, Sri Ramakrishna Bus ... vs The State Of Tamil Nadu, Represented By ... on 10 December, 1974
(23) We have pointed out in our previous decision that when an order of detention is produced by the lawfully competent authority and it is in proper form it would not be enough for the detenu to merely say that he did not know why he was detained. He would, in order to succeed, have to create doubts in the mind of the Court concerning the validity of the detention as observed in R. v. Home Secretary ex parte Soblen (1963 2 Q.B. 243) (8). In those circumstances if the detaining authority did not file a good return by proving every fact which was legally necessary to justify the detention, the detenticn would be quashed.
G. R. Luthra, Additional District ... vs Lt. Governor, Delhi & Ors on 3 September, 1974
(22) It seems to us that the law, as stated in the text of prol''s Wade's Book. Third Edition, is even more favorable to the detenu. It is based upon R. v. Governor of Brixton Prison where it was held that the detaining authority had to prove every fact which was legally necessary to justify the detention.