Search Results for "Preventive Detention Act"

946 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 946 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appellant in SEBI PFUTP Regulations Case Due to Non-Disclosure of Investigation Report. The Court Held That the Investigation Report Under Regulation 9 Must Be Disclosed to Ensure a Fair Hearing Under Principles of Natural Justice, as It Forms the Basis for the Show Cause Notice.

The dispute arose from a show cause notice issued by SEBI to the appellant, alleging violations of the SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trad...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Holds That Power Under Section 60 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 Is Quasi-Judicial and Requires Speaking Orders. The appellate authority must assign reasons while disposing of appeals under Section 60 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

The case arose from a reference made by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court (Coram: Nitin Jamdar & Sarang V. Kotwal, JJ.) which did not agree wi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Closes Habeas Corpus Petition After Detention Order Revoked by Government. Preventive detention order under Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 set aside by competent authority, rendering petition infructuous.

The petitioner, Rajkumar, son of the detenu Ganesan, filed a Habeas Corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras H...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes NDPS Proceedings Against Petitioner for Lack of Evidence of Conscious Possession and Commercial Quantity. Court holds that mere presence in a vehicle with contraband does not constitute possession under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of NDPS Act without proof of knowledge and control.

The petitioner, Mr. Kalam Narendra, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Hears Writ Petition Seeking Compensation for Illegal Handcuffing and Parading in a Bailable Offence. The Court Deliberates on Police Conduct and Fundamental Rights Under Article 21 in Context of Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The petitioner, a law student, faced five criminal complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, arising from dishonoured cheq...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Company's Challenge to SAFEMA Forfeiture Order for Property Linked to Narcotics Trafficking. Burden of Proof Under Section 7 SAFEMA Not Discharged by Claimant.

The petitioner, Imperial Exim (India) Pvt. Ltd., challenged an order dated 31 March 2011 passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property, New ...