Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.22 seconds)
Anju P.Anil Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 6 April, 2022 cites

Saji Joseph @ Sebastian M.J vs State Of Kerala on 4 August, 2010

It is also submitted that the representation was disposed of after the order was confirmed, which is against the dictum in Joseph Sebstian v. State of Kerala [2018 (3) KHC 889]. On the supply of documents it was argued that the earlier detention order was not supplied to the detenu and the last two bail orders, Exts.P5 & P6 dated 05.08.2021 & 13.09.2021 were not supplied to the detenu or perused by the Detaining Authority.
Kerala High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 8 - T R Nair - Full Document

Rafiya vs State Of Kerala on 8 April, 2009

As far as service of legible copies it is argued that there were three cases after the earlier detention. Even if such irregularities arise in two such cases, the requirement is of only one case when there is an earlier order of detention. As far as the complaints being those initiated by Police Officers, it is pointed out that in one of the attacks by the detenu, the shoulder of a Police Officer was fractured. The learned Government Pleader relied on Rafiya v. State of Kerala [2019 (1) KHC 63] and Joicy v. State of Kerala [2018 (3) KHC 37].
Kerala High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Jomesh Jose vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2015

It is argued that the last prejudicial act was on 11.06.2021 and the detention order was passed 2 1/2 months later, breaking the live link between the prejudicial act and the detenu as held in Jimesh Jose v. State of Kerala [2013 (1) KHC 49]. The Detaining Authority had not taken into consideration S.107 proceedings on 19.02.2021 WP(Crl)No.474 of 2021 4 initiated before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kottayam. Finally it was argued that, many of the pages of the documents supplied to the detenu were not legible.
Kerala High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 6 - P Ubaid - Full Document
1