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

2006 Supreme(SC) 484

B.P.SINGH, ALTAMAS KABIR
A. SHANTHI – Appellant
Versus
GOVT. OF T. N. – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. We have heard counsel for the parties.

3. One of the grounds urged in this appeal is that the detaining authority apprehending the imminent possibility of release of the detenu considered it necessary to detain him under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum Grabbers Act, 1982 (Act 14 of 1982). It is not disputed before us that the bail petitions filed on behalf of the detenu in those cases had been rejected and in fact no bail application was pending on the date on which the detention order was passed. However, the detaining authority in the grounds of detention stated that, "I am aware that Mr Athikesavan is in remand in Central Crime Branch 'X' Crime Nos. 315 of 2005 and 328 of 2005 and has moved a bail application before the 3rd Metropolitan Magistrate Court, George town, Chennai, in Crl. MP No. 140 of 2005 and the same was dismissed. I am also aware that there is imminent possibility of his coming out on bail by filing another bail application for the above cases before the Principal Sessions Court or the Hon'ble High Court since i


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