Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Huidrom Konungjao Singh Versus State of Manipur & Ors.

2012 (5) TMI 732 - SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.840 of 2012 - Dated:- 17-5-2012 - CHAUHAN, B.S (DR) AND MISRA,DIPAK, JJ. JUDGMENT Dr. B.S. CHAU HAN, J . l. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 13.l.2012 passed by the Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench at Imphal in Writ Petition (Crl.) No.98 of 2011 dismissing the Habeas Corpus petition challenging the order of detention of appellant s son dated 30.6.2011 passed by the District Magistrate, Imphal West District under Section 3(2) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

involved therein had been enlarged on bail the detenu in this case would also be released on bail and he would indulge in activities prejudicial to public order. 3. The appellant s son was served with the grounds of detention dated 2.7.2011. The detenu made representations on 16.7.2011to the Central Government as well as to the Government of Manipur which stood rejected. The detention order was confirmed vide order dated 16.8.2011and confirmation order was furnished to the detenu on 18.8.2011. T .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n Ayya alias Ayub v. State ofU.P. & Anr., AIR 1989 SC 364, this Court held that the law of preventive detention is based and could be described as a jurisdiction of suspicion" and the compulsion of values of freedom of democratic society and of social order sometimes might compel a curtailment of individual's liberty. 5. In Yumman Ongbi Lembi Leima v. State of Manipur & Ors., (2012) 2 SCC 176, this Court held that personal liberty of an individual is the most precious and prized .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6. Whether a person who is in jail can be detained under detention law has been a subject matter of consideration before this Court time and again. In Dharmendra Suganchand Chelawat & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 1990 SC 1196, this Court while considering the same issue has reconsidered its earlier judgments on the point in Rameshwar Shaw v. District Magistrate, Burdwan, AIR 1964 SC 334; Masood Alam v. Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 897; Dulal Roy v. District Magistrate, Burdwan, AIR .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at purpose it is necessary that the grounds of detention must show that (i) the detaining authority was aware of the fact that the detenu is already in detention; and (ii) there were compelling reasons justifying such detention despite the fact that the detenu is already in detention. The expression "compelling reasons" in the context of making an order for detention of a person already in custody implies that there must be cogent material before the detaining authority on the basis of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issue arose as the detaining authority recorded his satisfaction for detention under the Act, in view of the fact that the person, who was already in jail, was going to move a bail application. In the grounds of detention it had been mentioned that there was "likelihood of the detenu moving an application for bail" and hence detention was necessary. This Court held that there must be cogent materials before the authority passing the detention order that there was likelihood of his rel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

N. & Anr., (2006) 5 SCC 676, and held that the detaining authority should be aware that the detenu is already in custody and is likely to be released on bail. The conclusion that the detenu may be released on bail cannot be ipse dixit of the detaining authority. His subjective satisfaction based on materials, normally, should not to be interfered with. 9. In view of the above, it can be held that there is no prohibition in law to pass the detention order in respect of a person who is already .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ial to public order. (3) In view of the above, the authority felt it necessary to prevent him from indulging in such activities and therefore, detention order was necessary. In case either of these facts does not exist the detention order would stand vitiated. 10. The present case requires to be examined in the light of aforesaid settled legal proposition. Learned counsel for the appellant Shri L. Roshmani has submitted that the detenu had never moved the bail application after his arrest and he .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the detenu in the instant case was likely to be released on bail and after being released on bail he would indulge in the activities detrimental to the society at large and would cause the problem of public order. 11. On the other hand, Shri R.P. Bhatt, learned senior counsel appearing for Union of India and Shri K. Nobin Singh, learned counsel appearing for the State have submitted that it is not necessary that the co-accused in the same offence is enlarged on bail. What is required to be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s allegedly granted by the court concerned. Neither the date of the alleged bail orders has been mentioned therein, nor the bail application number, nor whether the bail orders were passed in respect of the co-accused on the same case, nor whether the bail orders were passed in respect of other co-accused in cases on the same footing as the case of the accused…… In our opinion, if details are given by the respondent authority about the alleged bail orders in similar cases mentionin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ner is ordinarily granted bail……. A mere ipse dixit statement in the grounds of detention cannot sustain the detention order and has to be ignored…… In our opinion, there is a real possibility of release of a person on bail who is already in custody provided he has moved a bail application which is pending. It follows logically that if no bail application is pending, then there is no likelihood of the person in custody being released on bail, and hence the detention o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

g similar offence. It should be that the co-accused in the same offence is enlarged on bail and on the basis of which the detenu could be enlarged on bail. 13. So far as the appellant s son is concerned, he had been arrested for the offence related to FIR No.53 (6) 2011 under Section 302 IPC read with Section 25(1-A) Arms Act dated 14.6.2011. The FIR had been lodged against unknown persons, however, appellant s son was arrested on 19.6.2011 in respect of the said offence. Subsequently, the deten .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version