Back
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
Gopal Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts regarding detention of petitioners. (Para 2) |
| 2. details on petitioners' roles and company business. (Para 3) |
| 3. arguments challenging the independence of the detention authority. (Para 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. defense of detention orders based on sufficient grounds. (Para 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 5. consideration of bias and independence in detention authority. (Para 55 , 56 , 57) |
| 6. conclusion quashing the detention orders. (Para 123 , 124 , 125) |
JUDGMENT
Siddharth Mridul, J. - These two writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, essentially in the nature of writ of habeas corpus, have been instituted on behalf of Gopal Gupta, the petitioner in W.P.(CRL.) 1829/2020 and Amit Pal Singh, the petitioner in W.P.(CRL.) 1830/2020 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the 'detenu'), praying for quashing of detention orders bearing No. PD-12001/01/2020-COFEPOSA and PD-12001/02/2020-COFEPOSA respectively, both dated 21.01.2020, and for further directions that the detenu be set at liberty forthwith.
FACTS OF THE CASE:-
2. The relevant facts qua the detenus, as are necessary for the adjudication of the subject writ petitions are briefly encapsulated as fo
The Detaining Authority must act independently and with an open mind, and should not prejudge the issue even before considering the materials produced before him by the sponsoring authority. There sh....
Quash of Detention order - Delay in passing detention order - There is nothing in Section 3 of COFEPOSA or in scheme of Act, which suggests that the especially empowered officer must act only on rece....
Quash of Detention order - Delay in passing detention order - There is nothing in Section 3 of COFEPOSA or in scheme of Act, which suggests that the especially empowered officer must act only on rece....
Action under Section 7 of COFEPOSA Act is not mandatory, failure to take action under section gives scope for doubt regarding assertion that detenu had absconded or concealed himself to avoid arrest.
Preventive detention orders must strictly comply with procedural safeguards, including timely communication of grounds and consideration of representations; non-compliance renders detention invalid.
Section 7 of the COFEPOSA Act may be beneficially quoted - Powers in relation to absconding persons If the appropriate Government has reason to believe that a person in respect of whom a detention or....
Preventive detention orders are invalidated if the grounds for detention are communicated in illegible or untranslated documents, infringing the detenu's constitutional rights to make effective repre....
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
