Ichhu Devi Choraria vs Union Of India & Ors on 9 September, 1980
In Icchu Devi Choraria Vs. Union of India reported in 1980 (4) SCC
531, the Apex Court has held as follows:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.27 seconds)Tara Chand vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors. on 23 September, 1980
In the decisions in Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in
1980 (2) SCC 321 and in Raghavendra Singh Vs. Superintendent, District Jail,
reported in 1986 (1) SCC 650, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that any inordinate
and unexplained delay on the part of the Government in considering the
representation renders the detention illegal.
Raghavendra Singh vs Superintendent, District Jail, Kanpur ... on 28 November, 1985
In the decisions in Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in
1980 (2) SCC 321 and in Raghavendra Singh Vs. Superintendent, District Jail,
reported in 1986 (1) SCC 650, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that any inordinate
and unexplained delay on the part of the Government in considering the
representation renders the detention illegal.
K.M. Abdulla Kunhi And B.L. Abdul Khader vs Union Of India And Ors., State Of ... on 23 January, 1991
In K.M.Abdulla Kunhi v. Union of India, (1991) 1 SCC 476, it has
been held as follows:-
Sri Ram Skukrya Mhatre vs R.D. Tyagi And Others on 23 January, 1992
In Ram Sukrya Mhatre v. R.D.Tyagi, 1992 Supp (3) SCC 65, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court held thus;-
Rajammal vs State Of Tamil Nadu And Another on 14 December, 1998
In Rajammal Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in 1999(1)SCC 417,
the Apex Court has held that the representation was received by the Secretary
to the Government on 05.02.1998, the Government which received the remarks
from different authorities submitted the relevant files before the under
Secretary for processing it on the next day. Thereafter, the files were
submitted to the Minister, who received it on tour. Finding that there was no
valid explanation for the delay from 09.02.1998 to 14.02.1998, the Apex Court
held that the delay has vitiated the detention.
Solomon Castro vs State Of Kerala And Ors. on 7 January, 2000
In the decision in Solomon Castro v. State of Kerala reported in
2000 (9) SCC 561, the delay between 09.04.1999 and 28.04.1999 having not been
explained on justifiable grounds in disposing the representation, hence on
that ground, the order of detention was quashed.
Sherene vs The Commissioner Of Police, Office Of ... on 12 March, 1999
In the decision in Sherene v. The Commissioner of Police reported
in 2000 (1) CTC 8, this Court accepted the ground of unexplained delay in
considering the representation between 04.08.1998 and 25.09.1998 to set aside
the order of detention.
Jayanarayan Sukul vs State Of West Bengal on 5 November, 1969
17. After extracting the ratio decided in Jayanarayan Sukul Vs. State
of West Bengal, reported in 1970 (1)SCC 219 Mahesh Kumar Chauhan alias Banti
Vs. Union of India reported in 1990(3) SCC 148 and Rama Dhondu Borade Vs.
V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police reported in 1989 (3) SCC 173, a Division
Bench of this Court in Ramamurthy Vs., the State of Tamil Nadu, represented
by its Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.,
George, Chennai - 600 009 and another reported in 2006(4) CTC 181 in
paragraph 4 of the decision has held as follows:
Mahesh Kumar Chauhan @ Banti vs Union Of India And Ors on 2 May, 1990
17. After extracting the ratio decided in Jayanarayan Sukul Vs. State
of West Bengal, reported in 1970 (1)SCC 219 Mahesh Kumar Chauhan alias Banti
Vs. Union of India reported in 1990(3) SCC 148 and Rama Dhondu Borade Vs.
V.K.Saraf, Commissioner of Police reported in 1989 (3) SCC 173, a Division
Bench of this Court in Ramamurthy Vs., the State of Tamil Nadu, represented
by its Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St.,
George, Chennai - 600 009 and another reported in 2006(4) CTC 181 in
paragraph 4 of the decision has held as follows: