Back
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ARAVIND KUMAR
Vaddi Lakshmi – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. The background in which an order of detention under the 1986 Act1 has been passed is that there was a complaint under Section 384 of the IPC for extortion on 27.04.2023. This was followed by a subsequent complaint for commission of an offence under Sections 394, 376D and 411 read with 34 of the IPC on 01.05.2023. The detenu was thereafter arrested on 04.05.2023. It is an admitted fact that the detenu was released on 17.08.2023 as the Court directed that he is entitled for default bail.
3. The present proceedings arise out of an order dated 30.06.2023 passed by the respondent No. 2, the Collector, in exercise of powers under Section 3 of the 1986 Act. The relevant portion of the detention order is as under:
Preventive detention requires a clear connection between the offence and a threat to public order, not merely the nature of the offence itself.
Every breach of the peace does not lead to public disorder. When two drunkards quarrel and fight there is disorder but not public disorder. They can be dealt with under the powers to maintain law and....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of justifying the invocation of preventive detention laws and the distinction between 'law and order' and 'public order' in determini....
Point of Law : Detention order - there is every possibility of detenu committing similar offences in future, which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.- acts of the detenu cannot be ef....
(1) Preventive detention – There is fine distinction between “law and order” and “public order” – Mere registration of three offences by itself would not have any bearing on maintenance of public ord....
The distinction between 'public order' and 'law and order' is crucial in determining the justification for preventive detention under the P.D. Act, and the sufficiency of subjective satisfaction by t....
(1) Preventive detention – Mere apprehension of a breach of law and order is not sufficient to meet standard of adversely affecting “maintenance of public order”.(2) Personal liberty of accused canno....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
