Search Results for "Detenue"

530 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 530 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Closes Habeas Corpus Petition After Detention Order Revoked by Competent Authority — No Further Adjudication Required. The court held that when the detention order under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 is revoked, the petition becomes infructuous.

The petitioner, Chithra, mother of the detenu Rohith, filed a Habeas Corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition and Quashes Preventive Detention Order Based on Solitary Ground Case. Preventive detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 held unsustainable as ordinary criminal law is sufficient to deal with the case.

The petitioner, Angayi Kanakarathinam, mother of the detenu Ranganathan alias Rangarajan, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Cons...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition, Quashes Detention Order Due to Unexplained Delay Between Arrest and Detention Order. Preventive Detention Order Under Sexual Offender Act Set Aside as Live Link Snapped.

The petitioner, Kumaresan, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court challenging the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition Quashing Detention Order Due to Unexplained Delay. Unexplained delay of 51 days between arrest and detention order under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 snaps live link, rendering detention invalid.

The petitioner, Thiru Masthan, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the detention order dated 02....

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Habeas Corpus Petition, Quashes Detention Order Due to Unexplained Delay Between Arrest and Detention Order. Unexplained delay of 37 days snaps the 'live and proximate link' between grounds of detention and purpose of detention under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

The petitioner, Sarojini, filed a Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the detention order dated 29.07.20...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order in MPDA Case Due to Lack of Subjective Satisfaction and Unexplained Delay. Preventive detention order set aside as detaining authority failed to establish live-link between alleged activities and public order disturbance.

The petitioner challenged a detention order passed under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1981 (MPDA Act) and its subsequent ap...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Habeas Corpus Petition for Missing Husband — No Custodial Detention Found. Court holds that habeas corpus is not maintainable when the alleged detenu is not in police custody and his whereabouts are unknown.

The petitioner, Usharani, filed a writ of habeas corpus under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the police auth...