Search Results for "detention order challenge"

686 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 686 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act for Non-Application of Mind and Mechanical Recital of Grounds. Detenu's Right to Make Effective Representation Violated as Relevant Material Not Considered.

The petitioner, Rupesh Laxman Gaikwad, was detained under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act Due to Inordinate Delay in Considering Representation. Preventive Detention Order Set Aside as Representation Remained Unattended for Over Three Months, Violating Constitutional Safeguard Under Article 22(5).

The petitioner, Premchand @ Babu Punjabi @ Tatu Manohar Dhakani, was detained under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act Due to Improper Verification of In-Camera Statements. Failure to Record Subjective Satisfaction on Truthfulness of Secret Witnesses Renders Detention Invalid Under Section 3 of MPDA Act.

The petitioner, Pravin Ganpat Kakad, challenged an order of detention dated 21.08.2020 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Nashik City under Section...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act for Non-Application of Mind. Preventive detention order set aside as detaining authority mechanically recited grounds without considering detenu's custody status.

The petitioner, Rohit Sidram Khatal, challenged an order of detention dated 17/3/2020 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Solapur under Section 3 of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes COFEPOSA Detention Orders for Non-Application of Mind. Detaining Authority Failed to Consider Relevant Material and Relied on Irrelevant Grounds, Rendering Subjective Satisfaction Invalid.

The Bombay High Court delivered a common judgment in two writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writs of habeas c...