Back
VIVEK RUSIA, AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI)
Gajra – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed the present petition against the detention order dated 10.03.2022 passed by the District Magistrate, alirajpur in exercise of power conferred under the National Securities act.
The petitioner has been informed that he has right to submit representation to the State Government, Central Government and is also having right to appear before the advisory Board.
at the very outset, learned Government advocate for the respondent / State submits that apart from the aforesaid directions, the detenu ought to have been informed his right to submit an objection before the District Magistrate itself and if such a right has not been given then that vitiates the entire proceedings / order.
A similar issue came up before Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kamal Khare v/s The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2021 (2) M.P.L.J. 554. The relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid judgment are reproduced below:-
'33. In view of the above, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Kamlesh Kumar Ishwardas Patel (supra) analyzed the effect of not informing the detenu of his right to make a representation to the detaining authority itself in paragraph No.47 of the report
Failure to inform the detenu of his right to make a representation to the detaining authority renders the detention illegal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the absence of mention in a detention order regarding the right of the detainee to prefer a representation against the detention order before ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the detenu's right to make a representation to the detaining authority, as mandated by Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India, and the conse....
Failure to communicate the time limit for making a representation to the detaining authority in the grounds of detention violates Art. 22(5) of the Constitution of India.
Detention order quashed - Rights of Detenue - Detenu had a right to move a representation to the detaining authority till detention order is approved. In present case detaining authority has failed t....
Failure to inform a detenue of his right to representation and unexplained delays in processing representations under Article 22(5) of the Constitution vitiate detention orders.
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
