Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Supreme Court said that the object and purpose of the enactment of UAPA is to provide for more effective prevention of certain unlawful activities. To punish such a person who is continued as a member of such unlawful association which is declared unlawful due to unlawful activities can be said to be in furtherance of providing for effective prevention of the unlawful activities.
Allahabad High Court granted bail to Atikur Rehman who was arrested in 2020 along with Siddique Kappan and two others on their way to meet the family of the Hathras Rape and Murder victim.
The Manipur High Court directed the State Authority to pay Rs. 50,000 to the detenu as compensation for his illegal detention in a drug trafficking case.
Detaining Authority gravely erred in relying upon the illegible documents which is equivalent to non-placement of translated-RUDs in a language which the detenu understands, which consequently vitiates the ‘subjective satisfaction’ arrived at by the Detaining Authority.
Bombay High Court: In a preventive detention case, the Division Bench of A.S. Gadkari and Milind N. Jadhav, JJ., held that any
Of all the things a system should fear, Complacency heads the list. The case in hand gave us a wake-up call and made us question ourselves as to whether we have become complacent and conditioned while dealing with preventive detention cases. Having got that call from within, we decided to shake up and wriggle out of the complacency and do a reality check.
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: Moksha Khajuria Kazmi, J. dismissed a petition which was filed assailing the detention
Signing in English and understanding English are two different things and it cannot be said that if one signs in English, therefore he has full understanding of the language. In other order, the ability to write one’s signature in English does not translate to having a working understanding of the language.
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While dismissing the petition seeking release from preventive detention to the detenu involved in Pulwama
Calcutta High Court: The Division Bench of Rabindranath Samanta and Soumen Sen, JJ., allowed a writ petition which was filed invoking the
“Preventive detention in independent India is to be exercised with utmost regard to constitutional safeguards.”
Supreme Court: In a case where the detenu was accused of committing a series of criminal offences from October, 2017 to December,
Karnataka High Court: A Division Bench of B V Nagarathna and Hanchate Sanjeev Kumar, JJ. allowed the petition and directed the release
Telangana High Court: The Division Bench of A. Rajasheker Reddy and Dr Shameem Akhter, JJ., while addressing the matter has shed some
Jammu and Kashmir Government revoked the preventive detention of Jammu and Kashmir’s Former Chief Minister. Abdullah was under preventive detention since August
Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Tashi Rabstan J., in a matter relating to preventive detention declined to provide opinion over that of
Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Ali Mohammad Magrey, J. quashed the detention order of Masood Ahmad Bhat while directing for his release
Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Rashid Ali Dar, J. allowed a habeas corpus petition and quashed detention order of a person who
Supreme Court: Stating that the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority under COFEPOSA is not immune from judicial reviewability, the bench of
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Rashid Ali Dar, J., allowed a petition filed against the order of respondent