Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.25 seconds)The Customs Act, 1962
Mansukh Chhagan Lal Bhatt vs Union Of India And Ors. on 20 October, 1994
11. The Full Bench of this Court in Mansukh Chaggan Lal Bhatt v. UOI 1995 Crl. L.J. 1097 has also held that the scope of judicial review at pre-detention stage does not relate to situations where by sheer lapse of time either in serving the detention order or in passing the detention order, the nexus between the grounds and the order breaks down at a later point of time.
Vikas Aggarwal vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 July, 2007
13. The Division Bench of this Court in Vikas Aggarwal case following Rajender Arora case, inter alia, held that from delay in launching prosecution it may be held that order of detention is passed for extraneous reasons. However, this view is diametrically opposite to the Full Bench Judgment of this Court that the vitiating factors must exist at the time of passing of the detention order with which we are bound and which was not noticed by the Division Bench.
Union Of India & Ors vs Vidya Bagaria on 5 May, 2004
8. The counsel for the Respondents contended that the Petitioner could not urge grounds taken or available at the time of earlier petition; that no ground of delay in disposal of the representation had been pleaded and that the reasons for rejection of the representation were not required to be communicated and were available on file which was offered to the court. In addition, it was argued that grounds of delay in passing of detention order or in execution of same were not available to the Petitioner, the matter being at pre-execution stage. Reliance was placed on UOI v. Vidya Bagaria ; Naresh Kr. Goyal v. UOI and Sayed Taher Bawamiya v. Joint Secretary .
Naresh Kumar Goyal vs Union Of India And Others on 5 October, 2005
With respect, we find that the Judgments in Alka Gadia case, Sayed Taher Bawamiya case and Naresh Kumar Goel case are of the bench of three Hon'ble Judges respectively.
Sayed Taher Bawamiya vs Joint Secretary To The Govt. Of India And ... on 3 August, 2000
With respect, we find that the Judgments in Alka Gadia case, Sayed Taher Bawamiya case and Naresh Kumar Goel case are of the bench of three Hon'ble Judges respectively.
Additional Secretary To The Government ... vs Smt. Alka Subhash Gadia And Anr on 20 December, 1990
The third contingency of Alka Gadia case, namely, "that the order is passed for a wrong purpose" cannot be read as permitting judicial review as to merits of the detention order. If that were to be so, the Apex court would not have held that the scope of judicial review at pre-detention stage is limited. It is significant that the word used is "purpose" and not "reasons".
Administration Of The National Capital ... vs Prem Singh on 19 January, 1994
These grounds were in Administration of NCT of Delhi v. Prem Singh 1995 Supp ( 4 ) SCC 252 held to be the only permissible grounds on which at pre-detention stage, the detention order could be quashed.
Babu Singh And Ors vs The State Of U.P on 31 January, 1978
Reliance in this regard was placed upon para 22 of Babu Singh v. State of UP and Srikant v. District Magistrate Bijapur and Ors. (2007) 1 SCC (Criminal) 385, to urge that principles of res judicata and issue estopple are not applicable to matters of preventive detention. It was further argued that with the sheer passage of time and for the reason of Petitioner being no longer in "office", the detention order had lost its relevance.