Search Results for "investigation detention period"

642 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 642 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act for Non-Supply of Documents. Failure to Furnish Copies of Relied-Upon Documents to Detenu Violates Article 22(5) and Section 8 of MPDA Act, Rendering Detention Order Invalid.

The petitioner, Rohit Uddhav Kadlaskar, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court (Circuit Ben...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act for Non-Communication of Grounds. Failure to Supply Copies of Documents Relied Upon Violates Article 22(5) of Constitution and Section 8 of MPDA Act.

The petitioner, Rohit Uddhav Kadlaskar, challenged a detention order dated 10.11.2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Solapur under the Maharashtra...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order for Non-Application of Mind and Mechanical Confirmation. Detenu's representation not considered independently, violating Article 22(5) of Constitution and Section 3(2) of Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1985.

The petitioner, Smt. Marry Usha, wife of the detenu Gnana Prakash, filed a writ petition for habeas corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution of In...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Hears Criminal Writ Petition Challenging Preventive Detention Under MPDA Act, 1981. Detention Order Issued Under Section 3 of the Act Against a 70-Year-Old for Alleged Dangerous Activities.

The criminal writ petition arose from a preventive detention order issued under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slu...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Default Bail in UAPA Case: Exclusive Jurisdiction of Special Court for Extension of Investigation Period. The right to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC accrues upon expiry of 90 days and is not defeated by subsequent filing of charge sheet if application was made before filing.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of Bikramjit Singh, who was arrested in connection with a grenade attack at a Nirankari Bhawan in Amritsar on 18....

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Default Bail Under Section 167(2) CrPC for Failure to Pass Specific Remand Extension Order. Mandatory Production of Accused and Specific Order Required for Valid Extension of Police Custody Remand.

The petitioner, Parshuram s/o Bajirao Dongre, was arrested on 23.7.2017 in connection with Crime No. 85/2017 registered at Aheri Police Station, Gadch...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Default Bail to Accused in Murder Case Under Section 167(2) CrPC Due to Investigation Delay. Statutory Right to Default Bail Cannot Be Denied Even When Investigation Under MCOCA Is Pending, as Charge Sheet Was Filed After the Application for Default Bail.

The petitioner, Pankaj Sundarlal Yadav, was accused No.7 in Crime No.113/2015 registered at Police Station Gondia for offences under Section 302 read ...