Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.21 seconds)Article 22 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Ramesh Yadav vs District Magistrate, Etah And Ors. on 13 September, 1985
In
Ramesh Yadav v. District Magistrate, Etah and ors, this Court
observed as follows:
V. Shantha vs The State Of Telangana on 24 May, 2017
08. The same view has been repeated and reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in paragraph No. 13 of the judgment pronounced in the case of "V.
Shantha v. State of Telangana & others", reported in "AIR 2017 SC 2625",
that reads as under :
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The National Security Act, 1980
Thahira Haris Etc.Etc vs Govt.Of Karnataka & Ors on 15 April, 2009
05. The main plank of the argument of the learned counsel for the detenue is
that the relied upon material for detaining the detenue has not been provided to
the detenue in its entirety, as a consequence of which, the right of the detenue to
make a meaningful representation has been denied. On perusal of the record
relating to the detention of the detenue, as made available before the Court by
HCP No. 308/2017 Page 2 of 6
the learned Government Advocate, what gets revealed is that the detenue has
been provided the copy of the detention order, the letter addressed to the
detenue and a copy of the grounds of detention containing 19 leaves. However,
the details of the aforesaid 19 leaves and the contents thereof, except the ones
stated above, have not been spelt out. Therefore, apparently, the relevant
material viz. copies of FIRs registered against the detenue, etc. have not been
supplied to the detenue. This infringement, in view of the well settled
principles of law governing the field, renders the order of detention liable to be
set aside. Resort can, in this behalf, be had to the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court of the country in case titled "Thahira Haris V. Government of
Karnataka", reported in "AIR 2009 SC, 2184", at Paragraph Nos. 27 and 28, which
are reproduced hereunder, verbatim et literatim:
Preventive Detention Act, 1950
Sama Aruna vs State Of Telangana on 3 May, 2017
07. Since the detenue was in the custody of the police at the time of passing
of the order of detention, therefore, the question that arises for consideration is
whether an order of detention could be passed on the face of such an
eventuality? The answer to this question is an emphatic "No", taking into
consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph
No.24 of the judgment delivered in the case of "Sama Aruna v. State of
Telangana & Anr.", reported in "AIR 2017 SC 2662", which may be noticed :
1