Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.32 seconds)

Mahendrasinh Mangalsinh Jadeja vs State Of Gujarat & on 15 October, 2013

14. With regard to the reliance placed on the decision by the learned advocate for the petitioners in case of Mahendrasinh Mangalsinh Jadeja (supra) and Chandubhai Laxmanbhai Topiya (supra) would also not come to help the petitioners because now, the matter is considered on merits as the detention order is passed and produced on record for perusal whereas in both the cases, the Court did not examine the detention order on merits. In such circumstances, the decisions of this Court relied upon by the learned advocate on are also not applicable to the facts of the case.
Gujarat High Court Cites 37 - Cited by 12 - S G Shah - Full Document

Deepak Bajaj vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 12 November, 2008

12. On perusal of the impugned detention order, as it is produced by the respondent on record, the same is required to be considered on merits in view of the decision of the Apex Court in case of Dipak Bajaj (supra). On perusal of such order, it appears that there is sufficient material on record for the detaining authority to come to subjective satisfaction that the petitioners are likely to commit activity of Page 15 of 19 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 25 02:00:59 IST 2021 C/SCA/9294/2020 ORDER black marketing and so in order to prevent the petitioners from committing such activity, the detention order is required to be passed. It is recorded by the detaining authority in detail the modes operandi of the petitioners to siphon off the goods meant for fair price shops so as to sale at higher prices in the open market. It was found during the course of investigation that the petitioners were indulging in illegal activities of shifting the goods from the bags of the Government, containing the marking of the Government, to the other bags for selling the goods to the flour mills. The detaining authority has also referred to the video recording of such activity of the petitioners. Thus, there is subjective satisfaction arrived at by the detaining authority for passing the impugned order and therefore, no interference is required to be made while exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Supreme Court of India Cites 30 - Cited by 407 - M Katju - Full Document

Hardik Bharatbhai Patel Thro. His Fater ... vs State Of Gujarat & on 18 December, 2015

16. Learned AGP Mr. Joshi also relied upon the decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of Mukeshbhai Versibhai Desai through his brother Bharatbhai Versibhai Desai v. State of Gujarat in Letters Patent Appeal no.108 of 2020. However, the said decision is passed at the pre-detention Page 18 of 19 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 25 02:00:59 IST 2021 C/SCA/9294/2020 ORDER stage when there was no detention order placed on record and as these matters are decided on merits of the detention order, the same is not referred to in detail.
Gujarat High Court Cites 48 - Cited by 21 - J B Pardiwala - Full Document
1   2 Next