Back
SIDDHARTHA VARMA, RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA
Kamalveer Singh – Appellant
Versus
Adhikshak Janpad Karagar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This writ petition has been filed for the release of the petitioner – Kamalveer Singh, by issuing a writ of habeas corpus.
2. Brief background of the case is that on 10.8.2023 an incident took place whereby one Anuj Chaudhary was killed and a First Information Report was lodged on the same day which gave rise to Case Crime No. 598 of 2023 registered under Sections 302 and 307 IPC. There were four named accused in the case being Amit Kumar, Pushpendra, Aniket and Prabhakar and it was also alleged that there were some other persons who were not known to the First Informant. The First Information Report was got lodged by one Sandeep Singh.
3. Thereafter on 01.11.2023 on the basis of an added Section, namely, section 120B IPC, the petitioner was also implicated in the Case Crime No.598 of 2023 in a conspiratorial role. Further on 07.11.2023 in Case Crime No.818 of 2023, under Section 7/25 of the Arms Act, the petitioner was named in the crime. Still further, on 28.11.2023, the petitioner was implicated in Case Crime No.861 of 2023, under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. He was thereafter in jail.
4. Thereafter, on a report/
The main legal point established in the judgment is that preventive detention under the National Security Act must be based on specific and justifiable grounds, and the detaining authority must ensur....
Preventive detention under the National Security Act requires subjective satisfaction of the authorities that the detenue is likely to disturb public order based on gathered evidence and present cond....
The detention order was quashed due to procedural violations and lack of connection between the detenu's past conduct and the necessity for detention under the National Security Act.
The detaining authority must be aware of all material circumstances and provide complete information, and there is a constitutional obligation to afford timely representation.
The detention order under the National Security Act was based on the subjective satisfaction of the detaining authority, considering the likelihood of the detainee being released from custody in the ....
The court established that detainees under the National Security Act must be afforded the right to legal representation, and that detention orders must adhere strictly to statutory procedures regardi....
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
