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

2015 Supreme(MP) 854

S.C.SHARMA, D.K.PALIWAL
Pradeep – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Rajmani Bansal for petitioner;
Praveen Newaskar, Government Advocate for respondents/State.

ORDER

1. The petitioner before this Court is aggrieved by order dated 19.11.2013 passed by District Magistrate, Bhind in exercise of powers conferred under section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 ( in short, The Act of 1980).

2. The facts of the case reveal that the Superintendent of Police submitted a report on 2.11.2013 for initiating action against the petitioner under the provisions of the Act of 1980 and a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner did submit reply and stated that he is a political worker and, therefore, proceedings have been initiated against him under the Act of 1980. The reply of the petitioner was considered and a final order has been passed on 19.11.2013. The order passed by District Magistrate reads as under :

ßU;k;ky; ftyk naMkf/kdkjh] ftyk fHkaM ¼e-iz-½

dzekad D;w@jhMj@Mh,e@70@2013@jklqdk@673 fHk.M] fnukad 19 uoEcj] 2013

izfr]

iqfyl v/kh{kd]

ftyk fHkaM

fo"k; % vukosnd iznhi iq= gfjeksgu flga dq'kokg] mez 30 lky fuoklh jksgkuh lhxa iqjk Fkkuk ygkj] ftyk fHk.M ds fo#) jk"Vªh; lqj{kk vfèkfu;e] 1980 dh /kkjk 3¼2½ ds rgr dk;Zokgh fd, tkuss ckor~A fnukad 19-11-2013 dks esjs }kjk vukonsd iznhi iq= gfjeksgu flag dq'kokg] mez 30 lky] fuoklh jk







































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