SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1963 Supreme(All) 206

S.D.KHARE, B.DAYAL
NANDAN SINGH BHIST – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
KAMESHWAR PRASAD AGRAWAL

B. DAYAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Section 491 Cr. P. C. read with Article 226 of the Constitution of india alleging that the detention of the applicant under Rule 30 (1) (b) of the Defence of India rules, 1962 is illegal. Several grounds were taken when the petition was presented but many of them have now become without any force because of the decision of the Supreme Court and other circumstances. The only contention pressed by learned counsel for the applicant was that the case of the applicant was not reviewed according to the provisions of Rule 30a (9) of the same Rules.

( 2 ) THE facts which are necessary for the decision of this point are that the detention order against the applicant was passed by the State Government on the 9th of November, 1962. The applicant was, in the enforcement of that order, arrested on the 10th of November, 1962. The applicant made a representation against his detention and on the 31st of January, 1953 this representation was rejected. While rejecting this representation the whole case of the applicant was reconsidered and a decision taken that his detention order ought to be continued. The communication to the applicant merely stated









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top