AJIT BORTHAKUR
Sharukh Ahmed @ Muktar, S/o Late Baten Miya – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Sr. Government Advocate, Assam appearing for the State/respondents and Mr. P.S. Bhattacharyya, learned CGC for the respondent No. 1.
PETITIONER’S GRIEVANCE:
2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner on behalf of his brother-in-law Shahrukh Ahmed @Muktar, the detenue herein vide paragraph No. 2 of the petition (the Affidavit is sworn by detenue’s wife Manowara Begum) has prayed for setting aside and quashing a Preventive Detention Order, dated 16.03.2022, issued by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home & Political Department/respondent No. 2 to the petitioner informing him with detail particulars about his involvement in illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, with reference to 07 (seven) number of cases registered at Barpeta Police Station under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘N.D.P.S. Act’ for short) which prompted the Government to
E. Subbulakshmi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Haradhan Saha Vs. the State of West Bengal and Ors.
Hansmukh Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors.
J. Abdul Hakeem v. State of T.N. [(2005) 7 SCC 70 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 1601]
Ghanshyam Dass v. Dominion of India [(1984) 3 SCC 46]
Purna Bora @Dilip Bora @Baba@Kamandu Vs. State of Assam and Ors.
Radhakrishnan Prabhakaran v. State of T.N. [(2000) 9 SCC 170 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 1198]
Sushil Kumar Sen v. State of Bihar [(1975) 1 SCC 774]
State of Punjab v. Shamlal Murari [(1976) 1 SCC 719 : 1976 SCC (L&S) 118]
Sunila Jain v. Union of India [(2006) 3 SCC 321 : (2006) 2 SCC (Cri) 90]
State of Tamil Nadu and Anr. Vs. Abdullah Kadher Batcha
Yumnam Brojen Singh @Kunjo @ Boss Vs. District Magistrate, Bishnupur and Ors.
Section 13 of Act provides for interim release of a detenue for a specified period on executing bond with or without sureties.
Detention order - Failure of the Department to send a report as mandated under Section 3(2) to the Central Government within 10(ten) days as well as the mandate of Section 9(f) for confirmation of an....
Detention orders under the PITNDPS Act can be upheld when communicated timely and justified despite delays in arrest, emphasizing the subjective satisfaction of authorities against habitual offenders....
The detention order was unsustainable due to non-application of mind, unexplained delay in disposing of the representation, and failure to furnish necessary documents to the detenu.
Preventive detention quashed for lack of subjective satisfaction: 8-year gap between cases, acquittal in one, incidental recovery during warrant execution fail to establish live proximate link to pub....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.