Back
ALEXANDER THOMAS, SOPHY THOMAS
SWATHI S. W/O PARADEEP KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
1. The prayers in the instant writ petition (Criminal) seeking for writs of Habeas Corpus and quashment in relation to the challenge against the detention order issued under the Kerala Anti-Social Activities Prevention Act, 2007 are as follows:
(ii) Declare that Ext.P1 detention order and the detention pursuant to the same is illegal and vitiated.
(iii) To dispense with the production of English Translations of the documents in vernacular produced in this Writ Petition (Crl) in vernacular language.
(iv) Such other orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
2. Heard Sri.Sojan Michael, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. K.A. Anas, learned Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. The petitioner is the wife of the detenu, Sri. P. Pradeep Kumar, who has been ordered to be preventively detained under Se
detention order will not in any manner even remotely show that the detaining authority, after consideration of the said crucial aspect has found that there are compelling reasons justifying the preve....
Point of Law : Court are constrained to overrule the contention of the counsel for petitioner that, live link between the last prejudicial activity and purpose of detention has been snapped in this c....
Even if Court concedes that necessary action for contemplating for preventive detention have been taken by sponsoring agency.
Expression “compelling reasons” in context of making an order for preventive detention of a person already in custody implies that there must be cogent materials before detaining authority.
It is well settled that an order of detention can be validly passed against a person, who is already in custody, subject to condition that detaining authority must necessarily be aware of fact that d....
If there is inordinate and unexplained delay in passing detention order, then same is liable for interdiction in judicial proceedings.
Point of Law : Order should be passed under Section 3(1) to preventively detain detenu as he is likely to commit further prejudicial anti-social activities.
Point of Law : Detenue is already in custody in some other case, at time when the preventive detention order was passed, and should also satisfy the other parameter
A detention order can be validly passed under preventive detention even if the individual is in judicial custody, contingent on established criteria of likely bail release and previous criminal histo....
If person concerned is in judicial custody and if there is likelihood of his being released shortly, then detaining authority may stay its chance for a short while and think of passing an order of 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
