Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)
G. Balaji vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 27 September, 2006 cites

K.T.M.S. Mohd. And Anr vs Union Of India on 28 April, 1992

In that case, where the detaining authority failed to give a specific conclusion on the retracted statement, which is opposed to the decision of the Supreme Court in K.T.M.S. Mohd. and another vs. Union of India (cited supra). In such situation, the Bench has concluded that, "13. ...... mere reference to retraction is not sufficient and that it is incumbent on the part of the Detaining Authority to record his opinion before accepting the inculpatory statement, otherwise, the order will be vitiated. "
Supreme Court of India Cites 39 - Cited by 194 - S R Pandian - Full Document

Mathew Alias Mathachan vs State Of Kerala on 19 March, 1991

9. It is also brought to our notice that the detenu is under detention for eight months and the order of detention is for a period of one year. The Honble Supreme Court in the case of Mathew @ Mathachan vs. State of Kerala reported in AIR 1991 SC 1376, taking note of the fact that the detenu was under detention for eight months, quashed the order of detention, and ordered release of the detenu forthwith. Inasmuch as in the case on hand the detention order was passed on 30.12.2005, we are of the view that the above said direction is also applicable. We therefore hold that it is just and proper to quash the impugned order of detention and direct for the release of the detenu forthwith provided if he is not required in any other case or cause.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 7 - A M Ahmadi - Full Document
1