Preventive Detention Archives - Page 3 of 3 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

February 23, 2025 7:56 am

Preventive Detention

Constitution of India – Article 22(5) – Right to Information Act, 2005 – Sections 3 and 8 – Preventive detention – Notwithstanding provisions of R.T.I. Act, 2005, State is not under any obligation to provide grounds of detention to detenu prior to his arrest and detention

Jun 24, 2017 sclaw

AIR 2012 SC 3370 : (2012) CriLJ 3848 : (2012) 281 ELT 641 : (2012) 6 JT 314 : (2012) 6 SCALE 367 : (2012) 7 SCC 533 :…

Preventive Detention

National Security Act, 1980 – Section 3(2) – Preventive detention – Detenu an active member of terrorist organization ‘Vidial Velli’

May 20, 2017 sclaw

AIR 2006 SC 711 : (2006) CriLJ 560 : (2006) 1 SCC 515 : (2006) 1 UJ 347 : (2006) AIRSCW 1 : (2005) 8 Supreme 569 SUPREME COURT…

Preventive Detention

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article – 22, 22(5) – Order of detention – Court again reiterated the constitutional obligation of the Government to consider the representation forwarded by detenu without delay

May 14, 2017 sclaw

(2000) 69 ECC 465 : (2000) 2 JT 287 : (2000) 9 SCC 561 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SOLOMON CASTRO — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS —…

Categories

Archives

You missed

A suit in representative capacity (Order 1, Rule 8 CPC) is not maintainable if lacking locus standi, and a prior decree (res judicata) bars subsequent suits on the same subject matter, notwithstanding varying reliefs.

Feb 16, 2025 sclaw

Stamp Act State Laws

Agreement to sell immovable property incurs stamp duty as deemed conveyance via implied/symbolic possession transfer, with duty applying to the agreement (instrument), not the sale (transaction).

Feb 16, 2025 sclaw

The Supreme Court emphasized that the goal is to ensure just and fair compensation, even if it exceeds the claimed amount. It recalculated the compensation, considering the claimant’s monthly income, future prospects, 40% permanent disability, medical expenses, attendant charges, special diet and transportation, pain and suffering, and loss of income during treatment. The final compensation was determined to be Rs. 17,82,825, modifying the awards of the MACT and High Court. The Civil Appeal was allowed, with interest as awarded by the Tribunal. This decision underscores the principle of providing fair compensation to accident victims based on comprehensive assessment of their losses and suffering.

Feb 9, 2025 sclaw

In child custody cases, the lawpoint is that the welfare of the minor child is the paramount consideration, and a Habeas Corpus writ petition is maintainable only when the child’s detention is proven illegal or without legal authority

Feb 9, 2025 sclaw