SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(SC) 46

S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, A.P.SEN
Harish Makhija – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
DALVIR BHANDARI, HARDEV SINGH

ORDER

It is obvious that the period of parole cannot be counted towards period of detention. The petitioner should surrender and serve out remaining period of 141 days detention. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of accordingly.

APPENDIX

Application for Directions Filed by Advocate for the Respondents

To

Honble Mr Y. V. Chandrachud, the Chief Justice of India and his companion Judges of the Supreme Court of India.

Most Respectfully Sheweth

1. That the detenu Arjun Dass was detained on January 13, 1983under Section 3(1) of the COFEPOSA Act, in pursuance of the order dated June 28, 1982 passed by the State Government.

2. That the detenu Arjun Dass had challenged his detention before the Honble High Court of Allahabad by way of writ petition. The said writ petition was dismissed by the Honble High Court by the order/ judgment dated February 10, 1983.

3. That thereafter the writ petition was filed by the petitioner Harish Makhija, on behalf of the detenu before this Honble Court. This Honble Court by its order dated September 13, 1983, held that in the facts and circumstances of the case we direct that the detenu will be released on parole until further orders, but during the period o









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top