Back
P. NAVEEN RAO, G. RADHA RANI
Aktar Begum w/o. Md. Javeed Ali – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana, rep. by its Prl. Secretary to Government (Poll. ), GAD, Telangana State, Hyderabad – Respondent
ORDER :
P. Naveen Rao, J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner Smt B.Mohana Reddy and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for learned Additional Advocate General for respondents.
2. In these two writ petitions, petitioner is sister of two detenues viz., Mohmood Bin Alvi and Ayub Bin Alvi, who are detained by two independent proceedings dated 24.9.2021.
3. The orders of detention were passed against these two detenues on the allegations that they are involved in two recent crimes, Crime No.243 of 2021 registered on 17.7.2021 under Sections 302, 201, 120 (B), 147, 148 read with 149 IPC of Chaderghat Police Station and Crime No. 294 of 2021 registered on 18.7.2021 under Section 394 IPC in Afzulgunj Police station. The Detaining Authority also refers to previous involvement of the detenues in several crimes. In the case of Mahmood Bin Alvi, it is alleged that he was involved in 13 offences between 2002 to 2018 and that he was externed from the limits of Hyderabad Police Commissionerate in the year 2015 and there is no remorse and he continue to indulge in crimes. With reference to Ayub Bin Alvi, it is alleged that he was involved in six crimes between 2005 to 2017 and there is no
The main legal point established in the judgment is the exceptional nature of preventive detention, the need for subjective satisfaction by the authority, and the importance of strict compliance with....
If the detaining authority apprehends that since the detenu was released on bail, there would be imminent possibility of his committing similar offences, nothing prevented the detaining authority in ....
(1) Mere contravention of law such as indulging in cheating or criminal breach of trust certainly affects ‘law and order’ but before it can be said to affect ‘public order’, it must affect the commun....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between law and order and public order, emphasizing that the activities must have the potential to disturb the public peace and ....
Preventive detention must be justified by a clear disturbance to public order, not merely by allegations of individual offenses.
(1) Individual cases can be dealt with by criminal justice system – There is no need for detaining authority to invoke draconian preventive detention laws against an individual.(2) Detaining authorit....
Preventive detention requires clear evidence of disruption to public order, not merely the existence of criminal charges.
The exceptional nature of preventive detention, the importance of considering vital facts, and the distinction between 'law and order' and 'public order' in the context of detention orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that activities must have the potential to disturb public order by affecting the community or public at large to be considered prejudicial to publi....
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
