Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
69 judgments · newest first · showing 1–69
The petitioners, contractual toll‑collection employees, were arrested after an altercation with an advocate who allegedly refused to pay toll charges, leading to an FIR under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. While one lawyer filed a bail application, members of the Barabanki Bar and …
The appellant, a hospital director, was detained under the National Security Act (NSA) on 12 May 2021 for allegedly procuring fake Remdesivir injections. He filed a representation against the detention on 18 May 2021, which was communicated to the State and Central Governments, but the authorities …
The appellant, Gautam Navlakha, was arrested in connection with a UAPA case and placed under house arrest for 34 days after a transit remand order was stayed by the Delhi High Court. He later surrendered and was taken into police custody, seeking default bail on the ground that the house‑arrest …
The appellant was detained under the National Security Act, 1980 on 12 July 2017, and the District Magistrate reported the detention to the State Government only on 17 July 2017, a five‑day delay. The petitioner challenged the detention on the ground that the report was not made "forthwith" as …
The appellant, the Secretary to the Government (Law & Order‑F), appealed against a Madras High Court order that quashed a preventive detention order issued under Section 3(1)(a) of the National Security Act, 1980 against a man arrested in September 2012 for alleged breach of the Official Secrets …
The appellant, Arshad Hussain, was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC for the murder of Iqbal, based on the prosecution claim that he fired three shots from a 12‑bore gun after being prompted by his brothers, Mujaffar and Shahjad. The High Court acquitted the brothers on …
The Supreme Court considered a batch of writ petitions challenging preventive detention orders issued under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) and the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioners, many of whom had absconded or evaded …
Huidrom Shantikumar Singh was arrested for murder under Section 302 IPC and the Arms Act and, while already in custody, a District Magistrate ordered his detention under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act (NSA) on the basis that he might be released on bail in a similar case and could engage …
The appellant's husband, Yumman Somendro, was arrested in January 2011 for murder and, while in police custody, was served with a detention order under the National Security Act (NSA) dated 31 January 2011, which was later confirmed by the Governor for twelve months. The order was based solely on …
The husband of the appellant, an editor of a Manipuri daily, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on allegations of extorting money for the UNLF and causing a terror wave. The appellant challenged the detention, arguing that the grounds were vague, unsupported by …
The respondent was detained under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980 for a period of twelve months. He filed a writ of habeas corpus alleging an unexplained delay in the disposal of his representation made on 12 October 2005. The Guwahati High Court accepted the claim of delay and …
The Union of India appealed against a Gauhati High Court order that quashed a preventive detention order issued under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980. The detenu had filed a representation against his detention, and the Ministry of Home Affairs sought comments from the sponsoring …
The Supreme Court examined the detention of Abdul Kader and another detainee under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. The appellants argued that the State Government and the Ministry of Home Affairs had not considered representations made on behalf of the detainees and that there was …
The Supreme Court examined the detention of Sanjai Pratap Gupta (Pappu) under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. The detention order cited two grounds: his criminal antecedents and a specific incident involving murder on 13 October 2002. The High Court quashed the order, holding the …
The Bombay High Court quashed the detention of a prisoner under the National Security Act after finding that the jail officials had allowed unauthorised visitors to meet the inmate, facilitating conspiracies to commit murders. The High Court directed criminal prosecution of three jail …
The respondent, Manish Bahal, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980, and the detention was approved by the Lt. Governor of Delhi. Bahal filed a representation to the Advisory Board, which reported that there was sufficient cause for his detention. The Lt. Governor, after …
The Supreme Court examined applications filed by the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code to withdraw TADA charges against accused linked to the forest brigand Veerappan, whose kidnapping of actor Rajkumar prompted the Karnataka government to concede to …
The State of Manipur detained Sanasam Ongbi under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980. The Gauhati High Court quashed the detention order, holding that the State had violated Section 3(5) because the report of the detention did not reach the Central Government within seven days. On …
The Kerala Government, after initially consenting to CBI investigation of espionage cases under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, later withdrew that consent to allow State Police to conduct a "further investigation". The Supreme Court held that once the CBI, acting on the …
The petitioner, the wife of Suresh Chander Sharma, challenged his preventive detention under the National Security Act, 1980. The detenu had made a representation to the State Government within the prescribed time, which was rejected, and the representation was forwarded to the Central Government, …
The respondents were detained under Section 3(1) of the National Security Act, 1980 by the District Magistrate, Jaisalmer on 7 January 1987. Grounds of detention were not supplied within the statutory five‑day period; the magistrate recorded “exceptional circumstances” on 11 January and supplied the …
The Supreme Court examined whether an officer specially empowered under the COFEPOSA Act or the PIT NDPS Act to make a preventive detention order is required to consider the detainee's representation against that order. It held that the officer who makes the order is the detaining authority and must …
Surya Prakash Sharma was detained under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980 while already in judicial custody for a murder case. The grounds of detention alleged that he might commit further serious offences if released on bail. The Supreme Court examined whether a preventive detention …
The Supreme Court dismissed a joint writ petition filed by two British nationals, David Patrick Ward and Stephen Hillman, who were detained under Sections 3(1) and 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 by the Nagaland State Government for alleged involvement with Naga insurgents. The petitioners …
The petitioner, Abhay Sridhar Ambulkar, was detained under the National Security Act, 1980 by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay, based on a government order dated 6 January 1990 that conferred detention powers on the Commissioner for a three‑month period. The petitioner challenged the …
Vashisht Narain Karwaria was detained under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980 after a police report described him as a hardened criminal with a gang and alleged many pending cases, although only one case was on record. The detaining authority relied on these extraneous statements, …
Mrs. T. Devaki, wife of R. Thamaraikani, challenged a detention order dated 15‑08‑1989 issued under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1982. The order, passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, alleged that Thamaraikani’s assault on a minister at a public seminar …
Sukhjinder Singh was detained under the National Security Act, 1980 on 28 May 1988. His son, Sukhpal Singh, filed writ petitions seeking habeas corpus, alleging that the detention order was issued without subjective satisfaction, that there was an inordinate delay in considering the detenu's …
Jitender Tyagi was detained under the National Security Act, 1980 by an order dated 19 January 1989 issued by the Delhi Police Commissioner, who was delegated the power by the Delhi Administration. The order was approved by the Administrator on 31 January 1989. Tyagi challenged the detention on …
The petition challenged a detention order issued under Section 3(2) read with 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980 against Praveen Kumar Gupta, who was already in jail for an IPC 307 offence. The order was based on a solitary incident in which he shot a person, causing communal tension and an …
The petitioner challenged his preventive detention under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980, arguing that the order dated 15 April 1988 was executed after an unreasonable delay (arrest on 2 October 1988) and that the grounds cited were not genuinely related to public order and were …
The wife of Nallathambi challenged his preventive detention under the National Security Act, 1980, arguing that the detention order was made while he was already in jail for a bank dacoity and that the authority failed to consider any likelihood of his release. The Supreme Court examined whether …
J.F. Pathan was detained on 12 October 1988 under Section 3(1) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑Social Activities Act, 1985. He had earlier been detained in 1985 under the National Security Act and in 1986 under the same PASA Act, both orders later quashed by the Gujarat High Court. The detaining …
The petitioner, Rama Dhondu Borade, was detained under the National Security Act, 1980 on the ground that his activities threatened public order in Greater Bombay. He filed a writ petition challenging the legality of his detention, alleging that the Union of India unreasonably delayed consideration …
The petition challenged a detention order dated 23 May 1988 issued by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad under Section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti‑Social Activities Act, 1985 against Abdul Latif Abdul Wahab Sheikh, who was already in jail. The petitioner argued that the detaining …
The petitioner, Sharad Kumar Tyagi, challenged his preventive detention under the National Security Act, 1980, arguing that the three incidents cited—extortion of "chauth" from a mango garden contractor, a shopkeeper, and a market threat with a revolver—did not affect public order, that the third …
Two Delhi Police personnel, Ram Ratan (Head Constable) and Hawa Singh (Constable), were arrested for assaulting a rickshaw puller and seizing TV parts, offences under IPC sections 392 and 34. While the criminal case was pending, the Commissioner of Police detained them under Section 3(2) of the …
Ayya alias Ayub, while already in judicial custody for alleged offences, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on three grounds alleging threats to public order. The petitioner challenged the detention, arguing that the first two grounds (non‑cognizable bus attacks) …
Yogendra Murari was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 after three violent incidents that disturbed public order. He challenged the detention on grounds that the order improperly included incidents unrelated to public order, was delayed beyond four months, was intended to …
Arun Aggarwal, already in jail for five non‑bailable offences, was detained under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 on August 3, 1987. The detention order, approved under Section 12(1) after an Advisory Board opinion, was based solely on the fact that he was seeking bail and there was a …
Kamal Kishore Saini was detained under section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on three criminal grounds. He challenged the detention before the Allahabad High Court, which quashed the order on the ground that he was not supplied with vital documents (statements under Sec. 161 CrPC, …
The appellants, contractors for supplying ballast to the Public Works Department, were detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on grounds that they had attacked a rival contractor with firearms and grenades, allegedly to intimidate him and influence tendering. They challenged …
Piara Singh was detained under the National Security Act, 1980 and later served with a detention order under COFEPOSA. After his COFEPOSA detention was revoked, he failed to make a representation against the NSA order, believing he was only detained under COFEPOSA. He subsequently filed a …
Gulab Mehra, an under‑trial prisoner, was served with a detention order under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act while already in jail. He challenged the order on grounds that the detention grounds were vague, the detaining authority had not applied its mind, and that a preventive detention …
The appellant was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 and filed two representations – one to the Chief Minister and another to the Advisory Board – seeking release. While the Advisory Board considered the second representation promptly, the Chief Minister’s office delayed …
Following the opening of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple, communal agitation erupted and the petitioners were alleged to have incited violence, leading to their arrest on several IPC charges. While their bail applications were pending, the District Magistrate issued preventive detention orders under …
The State of Uttar Pradesh sought to uphold a detention order issued under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 against Hari Shankar Tewari. The Allahabad High Court had quashed the order, relying on the Full Bench decision in Ashok Dixit v. State which held that a solitary assault …
The petitioner, H.L. Bhandari, was detained under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 on 25 September 1986 and served with the detention order on 29 September 1986. A habeas corpus petition was filed and the Bombay High Court stayed the detention, but the stay could not be served before the …
Anant Sakharm Raut was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 based on three criminal incidents for which cases were pending. At the time the detention order was issued, Raut had applied for bail in all three cases and had been released on bail on successive days, but the …
Binod Singh, already in custody for several criminal cases, was issued a preventive detention order under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on 2 January 1986 and the order was served on 11 January while he remained in jail. He challenged the order, contending that preventive detention …
Rampa! Sahu was detained on 17 December 1985 under section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 for allegedly removing railway material and thereby prejudicing the maintenance of essential supplies. The State served the grounds, allowed a representation, referred the matter to the Advisory Board, …
Shamshar Singh, a practising advocate, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. He challenged the detention on four grounds: (1) a one‑day delay in placing his representation before the Advisory Board violated Section 10; (2) the Board failed to consider documentary …
The Supreme Court examined a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the detention of Ajay Dixit under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. The District Magistrate had listed six past criminal incidents as grounds, alleging that Dixit was likely to act prejudicially to public order. …
The petitioners, members of the Sikh community, challenged their detention under the National Security Act, 1980, by filing writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution. Justice Venkataramiah observed that these matters were not ordinary criminal cases but involved serious questions of …
The respondent was detained under the National Security Act, 1980, and made a representation under Article 22(5) of the Constitution, which was forwarded to the Advisory Board. He also filed a separate representation for revocation of his detention under section 14 of the Act to the Prime Minister. …
The Supreme Court examined the detention of J.S. Talwandi under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980. The respondent argued that the detaining authority failed to provide sufficient particulars of the first ground of detention, violating Article 22(5) of the Constitution, and that the …
The petitioner, Kamlakar Prasad Chaturvedi, was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 on seven grounds, two of which related to incidents that occurred in 1978 and 1980, more than five and two years respectively before the detention order dated 6 May 1983. The petitioner …
The petitioners challenged the preventive detention of Raisuddin under the National Security Act, 1980, alleging that the State Government failed to forward the detainee's representation to the Advisory Board within the statutory period, thereby violating Section 10 of the Act. The Court examined …
The State of Assam detained Sarat Mudoi under the National Security Act, 1980, Section 3(2) read with 3(3), issuing an order that did not specify which of the 16 notified supplies or services were affected by his alleged conduct. The High Court quashed the detention, holding that the order must name …
The Supreme Court examined two writ petitions challenging orders of preventive detention under the National Security Act, 1980 issued against Alijan Mian and Jadunandan Sah, who were already in jail and likely to be released on bail. The detaining authority justified the detention on the ground …
Devi Lal Mahto was arrested on March 2, 1982 and remained in jail when the District Magistrate, Dhanbad, issued a preventive detention order under the National Security Act on April 20, 1982. The petitioner challenged the order on three grounds: (i) the order was invalid because he was already in …
The Supreme Court examined two writ petitions under Article 32 filed by Merugu Satyanarayana and Bandela Ramulu, who were already in judicial custody when the District Magistrate of Adilabad issued preventive detention orders under the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioners argued that a …
Biru Mahato was arrested in January 1982 for offences under the IPC and was already in jail when the District Magistrate, Dhanbad, on 5 February 1982 issued a preventive detention order under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980, to prevent him from acting prejudicial to public order. The …
The appellant, Dhananjoy Das, was detained under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act, 1980 and was served with four paragraphs of grounds. He challenged the order on the basis that the first paragraph was vague and that the grounds related to law and order rather than public order, violating …
The Supreme Court examined a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the detention of Shri Dev Raj Dewan under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980. The petitioner's counsel argued that the grounds of detention included several criminal cases in which the detenu had been acquitted, and …
Ashok Kumar challenged his preventive detention under the National Security Act, 1980, arguing that the two‑day delay in furnishing the grounds of detention violated Article 22(5) of the Constitution and that the detaining authority failed to specify the period of detention and to link the grounds …
The petitioners, including A.K. Roy, challenged the National Security Ordinance, 1980 and the subsequent National Security Act, 1980 on grounds that the President's ordinance‑making power under Article 123 is an executive power and not "law" within the meaning of Article 21, that the provisions of …
The petitioner was detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 and the State Government confirmed the detention after an Advisory Board reported sufficient grounds. The petitioner submitted a representation against the detention, but the State Government waited for the Board's …
