1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Validity of detention order upheld despite challenges on communication, discharge, and affidavit requirements.</h1> The court upheld the validity of the detention order despite challenges related to communication of grounds to an illiterate person, discharge in criminal ... - Issues:Validity of detention order based on communication of grounds to an illiterate person, discharge in criminal proceedings before detention, absence of affidavit by District Magistrate, and validity of detention order based on satisfaction of detaining authority.Analysis:The judgment addresses three main grounds challenging the validity of the detention order. Firstly, it is argued that the illiterate petitioner was not communicated the grounds of detention. However, the court finds this argument lacking merit as the detenu's representation after service of the order indicates that he understood the grounds. Secondly, the petitioner's discharge in criminal proceedings before detention is raised as an issue. The court does not delve into the truth of this assertion, stating that the detention was likely due to the disruption caused by the detenu's activities, even if criminal prosecution was not pursued due to lack of evidence or witness cooperation.Regarding the absence of an affidavit by the District Magistrate, it is contended that the detention order cannot be sustained without it. The court distinguishes this case from a previous judgment by Krishna Iyer, J., emphasizing that the absence of the District Magistrate's affidavit is not fatal. The court highlights that the affidavit by a Senior Officer in the secretariat, who was involved in handling the case at the government level, suffices. The court dismisses the argument that the absence of the District Magistrate's affidavit renders the detention order invalid.In this case, the affidavit submitted by the Deputy Secretary (Home Department) is considered sufficient. The Deputy Secretary explained that the District Magistrate was occupied with urgent law and order matters, justifying his absence from swearing the affidavit. The court concludes that the detention order was made by the District Magistrate after being satisfied of the necessity to prevent the detenu from acting prejudicially. With no other grounds challenging the legality of the detention order, the petition is dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
