Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.47 seconds)Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Biram Chand vs State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors on 28 March, 1974
15. The decision reported in Biram Chand v. State of U.P. ,
which is rendered by Division Bench of the Supreme Court, is
contrary to the decisions of three judges. The principles laid down
are as inter alia, First, merely because a detenu is liable to be tried
in a criminal Court for the commission of a criminal offence or to be
proceeded against for preventing him from committing offences dealt
with in Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure would not by
itself debar the Government from taking action for his detention
under the Act. Second, the fact that the Police arrests a person and
later on enlarges him on bail and initiates steps to prosecute him
under the Code of Criminal Procedure and even lodges a first
information report may be no bar against the District Magistrate
issuing an order under the preventive detention. Third, where the
concerned person is actually in jail custody at the time when an
order of detention is passed against him and is not likely to be
released for a fair length of time, it may be possible to contend that
there could be no satisfaction on the part of the detaining authority
as to the likelihood of such a person indulging in activities which
would jeopardize the security of the State or the public order.
Fourth, the mere circumstance that a detention order is passed
during the pendency of the prosecution will not violate the order.
Fifth, the order of detention is a precautionary measure. It is based
on a reasonable prognosis of the future behaviour of a person based
on his past conduct in the light of the surrounding circumstances.
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Haradhan Saha & Another vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 21 August, 1974
In case of State of Tamil Nadu through Secretary to
Government, Public (Law and Order-F) and another Versus
Nabila and another , the Honble Supreme Court referred the
Constitution Bench judgment in Haradhan Saha v. State of West
Bengal , wherein held that the power of preventive detention is
qualitatively different from punitive detention. The power of
preventive detention is a precautionary power exercised in
reasonable anticipation. It may or may not relate to an offence. It is
not a parallel proceeding. It does not overlap with prosecution event
if it relies on certain facts for which prosecution may be launched or
may have been launched. An order of preventive detention may be
made with or without prosecution. An order of preventive detention
may be made with or without prosecution and in anticipation or after
discharge or even acquittal. The pendency of prosecution is no bar
to an order of preventive detention.