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

2000 Supreme(SC) 378

S. RAJENDRA BABU, K. T. THOMAS, G. T. NANAVATI, D. P. WADHWA, A. S. ANAND
Sunil Fulchand Shah – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dr. A.S. Anand, CJI.—(K.T. Thomas, D.P. Wadhwa & S. Rajendra Babu, JJ. agreeing).

I have had the advantage of going through the judgment of our learned brother Nanavati, J. and I agree that these petitions should be allowed. Long period has lapsed since the detenus in each of these cases were released and no material has been placed before us by the detaining authority to warrant further detention of the detenus at this distant point of time. The detenus, in my opinion need not be directed to undergo “the remaining period of detention” because the nexus between detention and object of detention would appear to have been snapped during this period of about ten years, during which period detenus were free. In fair­ness to the learned Attorney General it must be stated that he fairly conceded this position. I find myself unable to fully subscribe to the view of brother Nanavati, J. relating to the treatment of the period during which a detenu is free as a result of an erroneous order of the High Court which is set aside on appeal. I would also like to give my own reasons in support of the answer to the other questions involved in these cases.

2. It would be appropriate to first


















































































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