Back
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Mahendra Son Of Shri Shyoram @ Shivram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ in the nature of habeas corpus, assailing the order of preventive detention passed by the District Magistrate, Sikar approved by the State Government and Advisory Board.
2. The District Magistrate, Sikar on the basis of the material and report submitted before it by the Superintendent of Police, Sikar, recorded satisfaction that with a view to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it has become necessary to direct detention of the petitioner. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the Rajasthan Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2006”), the District Magistrate passed the order of preventive detention for a period of one year on 13.06.2022. Vide order dated 13.06.2022, the State Government granted approval to the order in exercise of its powers under Sub-Section (3) of Section 3 of the Act of 2006. Vide memo dated 28.06.2022, the Government of Rajasthan forwarded the order of detention dated 13.06.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, Sikar
The advisory board's functions under the Preventive Detention Act are not judicial, and its reports do not equate to judicial decisions, nor are grounds for detention required to be explicitly detail....
Preventive detention – Even a delay of single day in placing order of detention before Advisory Board should be treated as fatal as it runs contrary to constitutional principles and legislative manda....
Preventive detention orders under the Rajasthan Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act must comply with procedural requirements, including affording the detenu an opportunity for representation aft....
Preventive detention orders must be based on specific, documented grounds that are communicated to the detainee, ensuring compliance with constitutional safeguards under Articles 21 and 22.
Preventive detention requires clear grounds and sufficient material to justify the detention, ensuring the detainee's right to make an effective representation is upheld.
Preventive detention under the National Security Act requires clear justification of public order disturbances, adherence to procedural safeguards, and can be validated by prior criminal history.
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
