Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
VINAY JOSHI, MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ
Bhushan S/o Chandrakant Pohokar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to detention based on bail status. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. criteria for detention orders should include consideration of bail. (Para 10 , 12) |
| 3. public order must demonstrate direct threats. (Para 11) |
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi, J.)
Heard Mr. Sumit B. Gandhe, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. A.R. Chutke, learned A.P.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Rule.
2. The petitioner challenges the order of detention dated 14.10.2023 passed by respondent No.2 which is confirmed by respondent No.1 vide order dated 4.12.2023.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has taken us through the impugned orders and the material which was before the Authorities at the time of passing the impugned orders. He submits that two offences are considered for passing the detention orders. The first offence is Crime No.554/2023 punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n), 376(3), 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act . It was registered on 20.4.2023. Another offence is registered against him as he has violated the externment order and, therefore, the offence i.e. Crime No.575/2023 is registered under Se
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
