Back
SOUMITRA SAIKIA, KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Ruchunyhunle Tep, Wife Of Shri Khukivi Aye – Appellant
Versus
State Of Nagaland Through The Chief Secretary Govt. Of Nagaland – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kaushik Goswami, J.
Heard Mr. Supongwati Walling, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Veto V. Zhimomi, learned Senior Govt. Advocate for respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and Mr. Z.N. Ngullie, learned CGSC for respondent No. 4.
2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner i.e. the wife of Shri. Khukivi Aye, is challenging inter-alia the Detention Order being No. CP/DMR/CB-19/2024-25/685 dated 13.05.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Police & District Magistrate, Dimapur, Nagaland under Section 3 (1) & (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act, 1980) by which the petitioner’s husband has been detained under the said Act.
3. The case of the petitioner’s husband/detenue is that he was arrested on 23.04.2024 and subsequent thereto, a Suo Moto FIR was registered by the Police at Dimapur East Police Station being Dimapur East PS Case No.0070/2024 under Section 384/34 IPC read with Regulation 7 of the Nagaland Security Regulation, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the NSR, 1962).
4. It is alleged in the FIR that information was received that UG cadre were collecting tax from business owners aroun
The court ruled that detention orders must provide specific grounds and materials justifying detention, especially for individuals already in custody, to uphold constitutional rights.
Detention orders must provide specific grounds and cogent materials; failure to do so violates constitutional rights and renders the order illegal.
Preventive detention requires cogent evidence and compliance with due process, including proper communication of grounds in a comprehensible language for the detenu.
The judgment established the necessity of compelling reasons and reliable materials for issuing detention orders, especially when the detainee is already in custody.
The Detaining Authority must be aware of the detenu's custody status and there must be compelling reasons justifying detention despite the detenu being in custody.
Preventive detention orders must be based on specific and substantiated grounds, with the detaining authority required to apply its mind independently to the facts of the case, and any significant de....
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
